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

Scope of Review of Magistrate Judge Orders under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) — Monetary Sanctions Issued Pursuant to Rule 30(g)

From Edmonds v. Seavey, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66012 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2009): Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), "a judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before the court," with the exception of certain enumerated dispositive motions. A magistrate's order relating to a non-dispositive pret ...
From Edmonds v. Seavey, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66012 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2009): Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), “a judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine any pretrial matter pending before the court,” with the exception of…
Continue Reading

Electronic Discovery — Litigation Hold Letters, Although Privileged or Work Product, Are Discoverable on a Prima Facie Showing of Spoliation

Electronic Discovery — Litigation Hold Letters, Although Privileged or Work Product, Are Discoverable on a Prima Facie Showing of Spoliation From Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68128 (D.N.J. Aug. 4, 2009): As a general matter hold letters are not discoverable, particularly when a party has made an adequate showing ...
Electronic Discovery — Litigation Hold Letters, Although Privileged or Work Product, Are Discoverable on a Prima Facie Showing of Spoliation From Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68128 (D.N.J. Aug. 4, 2009): As a general matter hold…
Continue Reading

Broad Arbitration Clause Confers on Arbitrator the Power to Award Compensatory Sanctions, Even If Contract Provides that Each Party Bears Own Fees

From ReliaStar Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. EMC Nat’l Life Co., 564 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2009): Where an arbitration clause is broad, arbitrators have the discretion to order such remedies as they deem appropriate.*** This is because it is “not the role of the courts to undermine the comprehensive grant of authority to arbitrators by prohibi ...
From ReliaStar Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. EMC Nat’l Life Co., 564 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2009): Where an arbitration clause is broad, arbitrators have the discretion to order such remedies as they deem appropriate.*** This is because it…
Continue Reading

Stipulations Are Binding Contracts and, If Court Approved, Should Not Lightly be Set Aside

From Porter v. King, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67552 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 3, 2009): Generally, pretrial stipulations as to facts entered into between parties are binding on the parties and the Court. See 73 AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE 2D STIPULATIONS § 7 (2009); see also Gander v. Gander, 250 F.3d 606, 609 (8th Cir. 2001). It is also "a ...
From Porter v. King, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67552 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 3, 2009): Generally, pretrial stipulations as to facts entered into between parties are binding on the parties and the Court. See 73 AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE 2D STIPULATIONS § 7…
Continue Reading

Specific Personal Jurisdiction Is a Claim-Specific Inquiry — Jurisdiction Exists Only for Claims Tied to Venue, and for Tort Claims Arising out of Contract with Sufficient Ties to Venue

From Cantex Energy Corp. v. World Stock Exch., LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67736 (W.D. Tex Aug. 4, 2009): [T]he Fifth Circuit rather recently decided as an issue of first impression that specific personal jurisdiction is a claim-specific inquiry, holding that "[a] plaintiff bringing multiple claims that arise out of different forum conta ...
From Cantex Energy Corp. v. World Stock Exch., LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67736 (W.D. Tex Aug. 4, 2009): [T]he Fifth Circuit rather recently decided as an issue of first impression that specific personal jurisdiction is a claim-specific inquiry, holding…
Continue Reading

28 U.S.C. § 1782 Authorizes Discovery in Aid of Private International Arbitration in Light of Intel

The recently reported opinion In re Application of Operadora DB Mexico, S.A. de C.V., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68078 (M.D. Fla. May 28, 2009), collects the caselaw considering whether a private international arbitration panel constitutes a "foreign or international tribunal" under 28 U.S.C. § 1782, in light of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Intel Corp. v. ...
The recently reported opinion In re Application of Operadora DB Mexico, S.A. de C.V., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68078 (M.D. Fla. May 28, 2009), collects the caselaw considering whether a private international arbitration panel constitutes a “foreign or international tribunal”…
Continue Reading

RICO — Role of Operation-and-Management Test in Assessing Distinctiveness between Enterprise and Defendant — Mere Business Relationship between Entities ≠ Operation or Management

From Crichton v. Golden Rule Ins. Col, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 17376 (7th Cir. Aug. 5, 2009): Florida resident John Crichton began purchasing group health insurance from Golden Rule in 1995 under a master policy offered only to members of the Federation of American Consumers and Travelers ("the Federation"), a nonprofit organization that pro ...
From Crichton v. Golden Rule Ins. Col, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 17376 (7th Cir. Aug. 5, 2009): Florida resident John Crichton began purchasing group health insurance from Golden Rule in 1995 under a master policy offered only to members of…
Continue Reading

Motions in Limine Not Covered by Scheduling Order Calling for Pretrial Motions by Date Certain

From Royale Green Condominium Assn. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66064 (S.D. Fla. July 24, 2009): Plaintiff is technically correct in asserting that the Scheduling Order ... calls for the filing of all pretrial motions not explicitly excluded by Local Rule 7.1.A.1 by or before February 16, 2009. However, motions ...
From Royale Green Condominium Assn. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66064 (S.D. Fla. July 24, 2009): Plaintiff is technically correct in asserting that the Scheduling Order … calls for the filing of all pretrial motions not…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction — State Tort Law Action Premised on Misconduct in Federal Litigation and Violation of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Not Removable under Grable

From Waris v. Ormond, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66687 (E.D. Pa. July 27, 2009): This case arises out of three earlier actions, Waris v. HCR Manor Care, U.S.D.C. E.D. Pa., No. 07-cv-3344; Waris v. Keystone Health Plan East. Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Civ. No. 05-12718; and Waris v. Frick, U.S.D.C. E.D. Pa., No. 06- ...
From Waris v. Ormond, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66687 (E.D. Pa. July 27, 2009): This case arises out of three earlier actions, Waris v. HCR Manor Care, U.S.D.C. E.D. Pa., No. 07-cv-3344; Waris v. Keystone Health Plan East. Court of…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Improper Coaching of Witnesses — Use of Ethical Rules as Standard of Conduct — Reputational Injury Confers Article III Standing to Appeal Even After Monetary Sanctions Paid —Intentional Failure to Prevent Client from Intentionally Dele

From Ibarra v. Baker, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16753 (5th Cir. July 28, 2009): Mary Baker, Scott Durfee, and Frank Sanders represented Harris County, Texas, and several of its law enforcement officers in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court found that Baker and Sanders improperly coached defense witnesses, gave or abided false test ...
From Ibarra v. Baker, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 16753 (5th Cir. July 28, 2009): Mary Baker, Scott Durfee, and Frank Sanders represented Harris County, Texas, and several of its law enforcement officers in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The…
Continue Reading
Previous414415416417418419420Next

Recent Posts

(1) RICO Pattern: Open-Ended Continuity — The Vendetta Exception — Jury Could Reasonably Infer That Scheme Directed at One Person, With Goal of Destroying His Current and Future Business Prospects, Presented A Threat of Continued Racketeering Activity Extending Indefinitely into the Future — Lawsuit’s “Fortuitous Interruption” of Scheme ≠ Lack of Threat of Continuing Racketeering Activity — Acts of Concealment Used to Perpetuate Violations — Multiple Schemes Not Required — Jury Could Judge Defendant’s Credibility in Assessing Threat of Continuing Criminal Activity — (2) RICO Conspiracy — Two Methods of Proof: Agreement to Overall Objective Or to Commit Predicate Acts — Agreement Can Be Inferred from Conduct — Conspirator Needn’t Know All Details, Have Contact with Other Conspirators Or Participate in Every Stage

Experts: “Normally, Courts Are Loath to Outright Dismiss An Expert” (Good Quote) — Experts Are Unhelpful If They Misstate the Law [Note Premise That Testimony on Law Not Precluded Outright] — Rule 37 Sanctions Unwarranted for Unjustifiable Failure to Produce Relevant Document Already in Requester’s Possession

FRAP 38 Sanctions: (1) Pressing Objectively Frivolous Arguments, Multiple Misstatements at Oral Argument and Failure to Address What District Judge Said Warrant Award against Appellants’ Counsel (Only) — (2) “General Award” of $5,000 Warranted Where Appellee Failed to Sufficiently Document Its Fees and Expenses [Goodyear v. Haegar Issue]]

RICO: Capital Call Investment Process Increasing Equity of Those Responding to Call at Expense of Those Not Responding ≠ Collection of An Unlawful Debt

RICO [And Constitutional] Standing: Concrete Injury Requirement Not Satisfied by Alleged Intangible Injuries of Intrusion Upon Seclusion, Confusion And Emotional Distress, Public Disclosure of Private Facts, Deterred Speech On Nondefamatory Matters, Violation Of First Amendment Rights, And Compulsion

Rule 37(b) Sanctions: Striking of Answer, Default Judgment, Civil Contempt and Piercing Corporate Veil for Deliberate Disregard of Multiple Orders to Produce — Finding of Deliberate Disregard of Court Order Is Factual, Triggering Clear Error Review — Discretion Narrows When Default Sanction Involved — Fourth Circuit Factors for Rule 37 Default Sanction Are Different Than Those for Inherent Power Dismissal Sanction — Continued Defiance of Court Orders And Millions in Unpaid Judgments And Tax Liens Render Lesser Sanctions Futile

RICO: No Causation for Company Harmed by Governmental Customers Shunning It After Employee Publishes Book Admitting He Bribed Governmental Officials — Harm Too Indirect, Not from Bribery (Predicate Act) But from Customers’ Decisions to Shun and Publication of Book (Both Lawful) — Customers Injured by Bribery of Their Officials Are More Direct Plaintiffs

FRAP 38 Sanctions for Frivolous Opposition to Arbitration

Extrinsic Fraud Exception to Rooker-Feldman — Where Defendants’ Perjury, False Evidence, Flawed Legal Arguments Prevented Plaintiffs from Presenting Their Claim in State Court

Federal Jurisdiction: Party Can Waive Subject Matter Jurisdiction — While Federal Courts Must Ensure They Do Not Lack Subject Matter Jurisdiction, There Is No Duty to Find and Exercise It

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

© 2025 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice