New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Complex Lit Blog

A Brief Glimpse into Another World

From United States v. Hutchinson, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16776 (10th Cir. July 27, 2009): Denver's Alpine Rose Motel was something of a "drive-thru" crack market. Customers needed only to pull their cars into the parking lot to receive window-side service from one of the motel's resident drug runners. A runner would take the customer's or ...
From United States v. Hutchinson, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16776 (10th Cir. July 27, 2009): Denver’s Alpine Rose Motel was something of a “drive-thru” crack market. Customers needed only to pull their cars into the parking lot to receive window-side…
Continue Reading

Email Authentication — Hard Copies of Emails Prima Facie Authenticated Circumstantially by being Found in Person’s Residence and Bearing His Name

From United States v. Vaghari, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64793 (E.D. Pa. July 27, 2009): Defendants argue that the emails that form the basis of Overt Acts 1-4, 10-11, 15, 17, 26, 30, and 35-36 cannot be properly authenticated and therefore may not be introduced into evidence. *** According to defendants, as "the government has no witness who ...
From United States v. Vaghari, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64793 (E.D. Pa. July 27, 2009): Defendants argue that the emails that form the basis of Overt Acts 1-4, 10-11, 15, 17, 26, 30, and 35-36 cannot be properly authenticated and…
Continue Reading

Website Summaries of Judicially-Noticeable Government Documents Satisfy 803(17)

From Global Computere Enters. v. United States, 2009 U.S. Claims LEXIS 259 (Fed. Cl. May 29, 2009): QSS also argues that commercially obtained materials purporting to be excerpts from federal financial IT procurements are inadmissible hearsay to which no exception applies. *** During oral argument, QSS's counsel stated: ...
From Global Computere Enters. v. United States, 2009 U.S. Claims LEXIS 259 (Fed. Cl. May 29, 2009): QSS also argues that commercially obtained materials purporting to be excerpts from federal financial IT procurements are inadmissible hearsay to which no exception…
Continue Reading

Counsel’s Undisclosed Change of Flight Plans, Requiring Opponent to Split Deposition into Two Days, Constitutes “Impeding, Delaying, or Frustrating” Deposition within Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(d)(2), Triggering Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

From Campos v. MTD Prods., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63846 (M.D. Tenn. July 24, 2009): While the record does not indicate that [defense counsel] acted intentionally or maliciously ..., he was careless and discourteous. Most notably, when his plans changed and he needed to change his flight out of San Antonio, [he] apparently made no ...
From Campos v. MTD Prods., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63846 (M.D. Tenn. July 24, 2009): While the record does not indicate that [defense counsel] acted intentionally or maliciously …, he was careless and discourteous. Most notably, when his plans…
Continue Reading

Less Stringent Review Accorded Pro Se Complaint Even After Twombly and Iqbal — But Not When Filed by Disbarred Lawyer

From Fagan v. United States District Court, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63629 (S.D.N.Y. July 24, 2009): Even after Twombly and Iqbal, when reviewing a pro se complaint, the Court must use less stringent standards than if the complaint had been drafted by counsel and must construe a pro se complaint liberally. See ...
From Fagan v. United States District Court, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63629 (S.D.N.Y. July 24, 2009): Even after Twombly and Iqbal, when reviewing a pro se complaint, the Court must use less stringent standards than if the complaint had been…
Continue Reading

Failure to Afford 21 Days’ Notice of Rule 11 Motion Requires Denial — Warning Letter Is No Substitute for a Motion

From Wild Game NG, LLC v. Wong’s Int’l (USA) Corp., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16257 (9th Cir. June 12, 2009): Party-initiated sanctions under Rule 11 require strict compliance with the 21-day safe harbor provision of Rule 11. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(2). Informal warnings threatening to seek Rule 11 sanctions are not enough, because th ...
From Wild Game NG, LLC v. Wong’s Int’l (USA) Corp., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16257 (9th Cir. June 12, 2009): Party-initiated sanctions under Rule 11 require strict compliance with the 21-day safe harbor provision of Rule 11. See Fed. R.…
Continue Reading

In Awarding Statutory Attorneys’ Fees, Court May Consider that Verdict was Substantially Less than Pretrial Settlement Offer in Assessing Success

From Lohman v. Borough, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16245 (3d Cir. July 23, 2009): The jury awarded Lohman $ 12,205.00 in lost wages and nominal damages, after finding Appellees liable on one of Lohman's three First Amendment retaliation claims. Lohman contends that the District Court improperly considered settlement negotiations between the ...
From Lohman v. Borough, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16245 (3d Cir. July 23, 2009): The jury awarded Lohman $ 12,205.00 in lost wages and nominal damages, after finding Appellees liable on one of Lohman’s three First Amendment retaliation claims. Lohman…
Continue Reading

Electronic Discovery — Sweeping Requests for Metadata as a Waste of Time and Money

From Dahl v. Bain Capital Partners, LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52551, at *7 (D. Mass. June 22, 2009): The court's concern over the goal of discovery is also relevant to the parties' dispute over metadata.... [T]he court believes the parties must be concerned with uncovering admissible evidence. The Shareholders seek all of the metadata a ...
From Dahl v. Bain Capital Partners, LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52551, at *7 (D. Mass. June 22, 2009): The court’s concern over the goal of discovery is also relevant to the parties’ dispute over metadata…. [T]he court believes the…
Continue Reading

RICO Claims Not “Preempted” by Fair Labor Standards Act — Caselaw Split

From Kuznyetsov v. West Penn Allegheny Health Sys., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61620 (W.D. Pa. July 20, 2009): Plaintiffs have sued Defendants alleging, inter alia, violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations A ...
From Kuznyetsov v. West Penn Allegheny Health Sys., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61620 (W.D. Pa. July 20, 2009): Plaintiffs have sued Defendants alleging, inter alia, violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the Employee Retirement Income Security Act…
Continue Reading

Computer Hacker Who Trades on Illicitly-Obtained Information May Violate § 10(b) Even Though Hacker Breaches No Fiduciary Duty — Circuit Split

The computer hacker in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dorozhko, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16057 (2d Cir. July 22, 2009), made a $200,000 profit overnight by hacking into a secure server to obtain earnings information hours before it was publicly announced and buying $40,000 worth of put options. The District Court held that this illegal conduct did not ren ...
The computer hacker in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dorozhko, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16057 (2d Cir. July 22, 2009), made a $200,000 profit overnight by hacking into a secure server to obtain earnings information hours before it was publicly…
Continue Reading
Previous412413414415416417418Next

Recent Posts

Inherent Power Sanctions — Dismissal for Threatening Defendant and Magistrate Judge — No First Amendment Right to Threaten Violence

RICO: Domestic Injury — Delivery of Fraudulently Non-Conforming Goods FOB Los Angeles for Shipment to China Means Injury Arose Domestically When Purchaser Took Title —Other Relevant Factors Include That The Non-Conforming Goods Were Sourced and Made in the U.S. and The Racketeering Activity (Mail/Wire Fraud) Occurred in, and Was Directed from, the United States — Irrelevant to Domestic Injury Inquiry Whether Property Is Tangible or Intangible — 7th Circuit’s “Injury-Felt” Test of Domestic Injury Rejected by Supreme Court — RICO Standing Requires Concrete Financial Loss, Not Merely Injury to Valuable Intangible Property Interest (9th Circuit)

RICO Causation: Parents of Children with Disabilities Deprived In-Person Education and Services during the Pandemic Were Not Causally Injured by Teachers’ False Assurances to Federal Authorities That IDEA-Complaint Policies Were in Place, Which Caused Funds to Issue But Not to the Benefit of the Disabled Children — Damages Too Indirect — Proper Plaintiff Is U.S. Government — Private Injunctive Relief Under RICO Uncertain in Third Circuit

Sanctions: Rule 37(b)(2) Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors

Inherent Power Sanctions — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Sanctions Power Extends to Conduct Intended to Sabotage Court’s Ability to Adjudicate the Case Before It, Here, By Commencing State Court Actions Seeking to Enjoin the Federal Plaintiffs from Proceeding with Their Federal Litigation — Sanctions Fee Awards: The Factors Used For Calculating A Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Do Not Govern — Under Goodyear, the Relevant Inquiry Is Whether There Is A Sufficient Causal Link Between The Sanctioned Misconduct And The Fees Awarded

RICO: Members of Association-in-Fact Enterprise Must Act with a Common Purpose—Mere Allegation That Various Defendants Agreed at Different Times to Engage in Various Fraudulent Schemes Does Not Plausibly Support the Essential Inference, That They Acted with s Sufficiently Common Purpose

RICO Causation: (1) State’s Misrepresentation to Federal Government That It Was Providing Plaintiffs with Mandated Special Education Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Injury Because The Failure to Provide The Education Was Not Caused by the Fraud on the Federal Government — (2) The Three Factors for Assessing RICO Causation — (3) Limits of the Second Circuit’s Decision in Alix v. McKinsey That Causation Can Be Established Where A Fraud On The Judiciary “Or Other Governmental Entity” Resulted In A Resource Going To Someone Less Deserving

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

Archives
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

New York Office

© 2024 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice