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

Sanctions — Prejudgment Appeal of Sanction Order Premature and Not Revived by Subsequent Entry of Judgment — Separate, Timely Post-Judgment Appeal Required

From Adams v. Ford Motor Co., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6460 (3d Cir. Mar. 26, 2009): On May 27, 2008, the District Court entered an order declaring, inter alia, that "the Court finds that Vincent A. Colianni, Sr., [counsel for the plaintiff] has engaged in misconduct by his post-verdict communication with a juror in contravention of Am ...
From Adams v. Ford Motor Co., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6460 (3d Cir. Mar. 26, 2009): On May 27, 2008, the District Court entered an order declaring, inter alia, that “the Court finds that Vincent A. Colianni, Sr., [counsel for…
Continue Reading

RICO — Both Deprivation and Acquisition of Property Right Essential to Hobbs Act Predicate

From US Airline Pilots Ass’n v AWAPPA, LLC, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106440 (W.D.N.C. July 11, 2008): Until recently, the phrase "the obtaining of property from another" as found in the Hobbs Act was construed broadly by the courts. *** In 2003, however, the Supreme Court significantly restricted the scope of the phrase "the obtaini ...
From US Airline Pilots Ass’n v AWAPPA, LLC, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106440 (W.D.N.C. July 11, 2008): Until recently, the phrase “the obtaining of property from another” as found in the Hobbs Act was construed broadly by the courts. ***…
Continue Reading

Post-Iqbal, Limited Discovery at Best Is Appropriate Pending Decision on 12(b)(6) Motion in Complex Cases

From Coss v. Playtex Prods., LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42933 (N.D. Ill. May 21, 2009), a consumer class action: Antitrust cases are typical of the types of cases where discovery is so burdensome and costly to parties that a stay pending decision on a motion to dismiss may be appropriate. Bell Atlantic Corp v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 54 ...
From Coss v. Playtex Prods., LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42933 (N.D. Ill. May 21, 2009), a consumer class action: Antitrust cases are typical of the types of cases where discovery is so burdensome and costly to parties that a…
Continue Reading

Noerr-Pennington Applicable to Lawsuits Brought by Governmental Entities

From Kearney v. Foley & Lardlner, LLP, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 10917 (9th Cir. May 12, 2009): [Appellant] Kearney claims that the [Noerr-Pennington] doctrine was meant to protect a citizen's right to petition the government, and never intended to bar suit by a private citizen against government officials. In support of her argument, ...
From Kearney v. Foley & Lardlner, LLP, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 10917 (9th Cir. May 12, 2009): [Appellant] Kearney claims that the [Noerr-Pennington] doctrine was meant to protect a citizen’s right to petition the government, and never intended to bar…
Continue Reading

RICO Causation ≠ But-For Causation

From Marlow v. v. Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43502 (D. Colo. May 12, 2009): [E]ven if Plaintiff had stated a § 1962(c) violation, he has not sufficiently alleged that his injuries were caused by that violation. Causation in the RICO context requires a plaintiff to show both "but for" causation and proximate c ...
From Marlow v. v. Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43502 (D. Colo. May 12, 2009): [E]ven if Plaintiff had stated a § 1962(c) violation, he has not sufficiently alleged that his injuries were caused…
Continue Reading

Rule 60(a) Motion to Correct Clerical Error Filed within 10 Days of Judgment Tolls the time for Filing of Appeal

From Catz v. Chalker, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 10908 (9th Cir. May 13, 2009): [This appeal] presents us with an issue of first impression in this circuit: whether a motion to correct a clerical mistake pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a) filed within ten days of the entry of judgment tolls the time for the filing of an appeal under Fed. R. App ...
From Catz v. Chalker, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 10908 (9th Cir. May 13, 2009): [This appeal] presents us with an issue of first impression in this circuit: whether a motion to correct a clerical mistake pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.…
Continue Reading

Self-Authentication of Evidence Downloaded from Public Authorities’ Websites — Who Must Create It & What Is a Public Authority?

From Williams v. Long, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91110 (D. Md. Nov. 10, 2008): Exhibit # 1 was a copy of printed search results from the Maryland Judiciary Case Search website, which was not authenticated by affidavit or other extrinsic evidence. The printed webpages contained information pertaining to three independent lawsuits…. ...
From Williams v. Long, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91110 (D. Md. Nov. 10, 2008): Exhibit # 1 was a copy of printed search results from the Maryland Judiciary Case Search website, which was not authenticated by affidavit or other extrinsic…
Continue Reading

Contractual Jury Trial Waiver Unenforceable in Diversity Action Governed by Georgia Law Despite U.S. Supreme Court Statements to Contrary

From GE Commercial Finance Bus. Prop. Corp. v. Heard, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41882 (M.D. Ga. May 18, 2009): Under Georgia law, a pre-litigation contractual jury trial waiver is unenforceable. Bank S., N.A. v. Howard, 264 Ga. 339, 340, 444 S.E.2d 799, 800 (1994) (holding that "pre-litigation contractual waivers of jury trial are no ...
From GE Commercial Finance Bus. Prop. Corp. v. Heard, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41882 (M.D. Ga. May 18, 2009): Under Georgia law, a pre-litigation contractual jury trial waiver is unenforceable. Bank S., N.A. v. Howard, 264 Ga. 339, 340, 444…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: If State Law Permits Non-Signatory to Compel Arbitration, Federal Arbitration Act Does Not Bar It and Permits Appeal of Denial of Stay of Litigation

From Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, 129 S. Ct. 1896 (May 4, 2009): [Non-Party May Enforce Arbitration Agreement under FAA If Permitted to Do So under State Law] Section 2 — the FAA's substantive mandate — makes written arbitration agreements "valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law ...
From Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, 129 S. Ct. 1896 (May 4, 2009): [Non-Party May Enforce Arbitration Agreement under FAA If Permitted to Do So under State Law] Section 2 — the FAA’s substantive mandate — makes written arbitration agreements…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court Holds that Decision Declining Supplemental Jurisdiction Is Appealable Despite § 1447(d) — But Likely Only Because No One Challenged Thermtron

From Carlsbad Technology, Inc. v. HIF BIO, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 1862 (May 4, 2009): In this case, we decide whether a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction to review a district court's order that remands a case to state court after declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). The Cour ...
From Carlsbad Technology, Inc. v. HIF BIO, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 1862 (May 4, 2009): In this case, we decide whether a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction to review a district court’s order that remands a case to state…
Continue Reading
Previous428429430431432433434Next

Recent Posts

RICO Statute of Limitations — Storm Warnings, Not Thunder and Lightning (Good Quote)

Rule 37 Discovery Sanctions: Ninth Circuit’s Five-Factor Test for Gauging Appropriateness of Dismissal — The Limited Utility of Rule 12(f) Motions to Strike

RICO: Employer Suffered Harm to Business or Property When Kickbacks Paid to Employees in Real Estate Transactions Done for Employer — Expert Testimony Sufficient to Prove Harm — Proof That Employer Paid Above-Market Prices Not Essential — Non-Disclosure of Certain Damages in Initial Disclosures Cured by Expert Report, Which Also Rendered Initial Non-Disclosure Harmless

Spoliation: Dismissal Under Rule 37(e)(2) and Monetary Sanctions Under Rule 37(e)(1), Implicitly Reading The “Or” Between 37(e)(1) and 37(e)(2) As Conjunctive, Not Disjunctive — Clear Error Standard of Review for District Court’s Intent (= Bad Faith) Finding under 37(e)(2)(C) — Additional Monetary Sanctions Imposed on Claimants under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and Rule 37(a)(5) — No Right to Jury Determination of Intent under Rule 37(e)(2) — “Substantially Justified” in Rule 37(a)(5) Has Same Meaning As In Equal Access to Justice Act and Thus Rule 11 — Meaning of “Unreasonable and Vexatious” in 7th Circuit

Inherent Power Sanction of Dismissal — Preponderance of the Evidence Burden of Proof, Not Clear and Convincing Evidence (7th Circuit)

§ 1927 Sanctions — Must A Lawyer Who Unreasonably and Vexatiously Multiplies Federal Court Proceedings Be Acting “As An Attorney” When Committing the Misconduct To Be Subject to Sanction under § 1927?

Rule 37 Sanctions — Unfamiliarity With Litigation Process Does Not Excuse Intentional Disregard of Court Order — Also Affirming Rule 26(g) Sanctions on Clients and Counsel for False Representations That All Responsive Documents Had Been Produced

Supreme Court: Notice of Appeal Filed After The Original Deadline But Before Reopening by The District Court Is Timely — It Relates Forward to The Date of The Order Making The Appeal Possible — Second Notice of Appeal After Reopening Unnecessary

Rule 37 Default Judgment: Second Circuit’s Four-Factor Test for Imposing Defaults and Three-Factor Test for Lifting Them

Rule 37 Default Judgment — Tenth Circuit Multifactor Test Is Not Exhaustive But a Non-Exclusive List of “Sometimes-Helpful Criteria Or Guide Posts”— Appeal from Preliminary Injunction Mooted by Entry of Permanent Injunction — Difficulty in Collecting Damages Award May Equal Irreparable Injury — A Monetary Award For Past Conduct Does Not Preclude A Permanent Injunction Against Similar Wrongful Conduct Likely To Occur In The Future

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