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

The Five Most Significant Developments in Federal Practice of 2008

1. The enactment of Federal Rule of Evidence 502. 2. Expanded judicial deference to arbitrators (Hall Street v. Mattel; Preston v. Ferrer). 3. RICO causation vs. common law causation (Bridge v. Phoenix Bond). 4. Exacerbated opacity as to preemption and punitive damages (suspects well known). 5. The financial melt ...
1. The enactment of Federal Rule of Evidence 502. 2. Expanded judicial deference to arbitrators (Hall Street v. Mattel; Preston v. Ferrer). 3. RICO causation vs. common law causation (Bridge v. Phoenix Bond). 4. Exacerbated opacity as to preemption and…
Continue Reading

Denial of Summary Judgment Unreviewable after Trial on Merits — Failure to Raise Sufficiency of the Evidence in 50(b) Motion Likely Precludes Appellate Review

From EEOC v. Southwestern Bell Tel., LP, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 26105 (8th Cir. Dec. 19, 2008): We will not review a district court's denial of a motion for summary judgment after a trial on the merits. See Eaddy v. Yancey, 317 F.3d 914, 916 (8th Cir. 2003) ("Even a cursory review of precedent in this Circuit reveals that we do not rev ...
From EEOC v. Southwestern Bell Tel., LP, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 26105 (8th Cir. Dec. 19, 2008): We will not review a district court’s denial of a motion for summary judgment after a trial on the merits. See Eaddy v.…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Party’s Appeal of Magistrate Judge’s Order to District Court Insufficient to Sustain Circuit Jurisdiction to Entertain Defenses Personal to Party’s Counsel

After the personal injury claim against Mazda was successfully mediated, in Anthony v. Abbot, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 25704 (3d Cir. December 9, 2008), the defense lawyer drafted a release that extended to Mazda’s insurers and suppliers. One would have thought this unobjectionable, since the carriers would not pay without a release from Mazda and Mazda did no ...
After the personal injury claim against Mazda was successfully mediated, in Anthony v. Abbot, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 25704 (3d Cir. December 9, 2008), the defense lawyer drafted a release that extended to Mazda’s insurers and suppliers. One would have…
Continue Reading

Spoliation, Inherent Power and Rule 37

From Gateway Senior Housing, Ltd. v. MMA Financial, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98770 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 4, 2008): While Rule 37 represents a significant enforcement power to punish discovery misconduct, it does not represent the "universe of potential discovery abuse." Gregory P. Joseph, Sanctions: The Federal Law of Litigation Abu ...
From Gateway Senior Housing, Ltd. v. MMA Financial, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98770 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 4, 2008): While Rule 37 represents a significant enforcement power to punish discovery misconduct, it does not represent the “universe of potential discovery…
Continue Reading

Ability to Recover Statutory Damages under Both the Lanham Act and Copyright Act for the Same Injuries — Caselaw Split

From Lifted Research Group, Inc. v. Behdad, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99618 (D.D.C. Dec. 10, 2008): Although Plaintiff's Motion is silent on this question, the Court finds that it is unclear whether Plaintiff is legally entitled to collect statutory damages under both the Lanham Act and the Copyright Act for the same injuries. ...
From Lifted Research Group, Inc. v. Behdad, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99618 (D.D.C. Dec. 10, 2008): Although Plaintiff’s Motion is silent on this question, the Court finds that it is unclear whether Plaintiff is legally entitled to collect statutory…
Continue Reading

Excluding Evidence of Religious Activities as Evidence of Religious Beliefs

From Adams v. United States, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96989 (D. Idaho Nov. 21, 2008): DuPont seeks to exclude evidence of religious beliefs. For example, [plaintiff] Stevenson's proffer states that he intends to testify as to "church involvement, including a mission for the LDS church to North Carolina in 1979 to 1981." As another example ...
From Adams v. United States, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96989 (D. Idaho Nov. 21, 2008): DuPont seeks to exclude evidence of religious beliefs. For example, [plaintiff] Stevenson’s proffer states that he intends to testify as to “church involvement, including a…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Not a Game of Gotcha

From Calipine Corp. v. AP&M Field Servs., Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99178 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 9, 2008): The spoliation doctrine exists to prevent one side from denying such an opportunity to the other by destroying or altering material evidence. It does not, however, permit a party to avoid the contest by defaulting the other side through p ...
From Calipine Corp. v. AP&M Field Servs., Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99178 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 9, 2008): The spoliation doctrine exists to prevent one side from denying such an opportunity to the other by destroying or altering material evidence. It…
Continue Reading

Summary Judgment — Rule Barring Affidavit That Conflicts with Deposition Testimony Applied to Expert

From Johnson v. Louisville Ladder, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102031 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 14, 2008): In this case, Plaintiff has submitted the testimony of Dr. Dobbs in order to support his theory that a design defect caused the ladder's right foot to bend inward while he was standing on the ladder, causing him to fall. Defendants contend that cer ...
From Johnson v. Louisville Ladder, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102031 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 14, 2008): In this case, Plaintiff has submitted the testimony of Dr. Dobbs in order to support his theory that a design defect caused the ladder’s right…
Continue Reading

Gaps in Federal Rule of Evidence 502: Larry Fox’s View

Download associated file: Fox on Gaps in New Rule 502.pdf  Lawrence J. Fox, a former Chair of (1) the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility and (2) the ABA Section of Litigation, has identified what he considers to be "four really important issu ...
Download associated file: Fox on Gaps in New Rule 502.pdf  Lawrence J. Fox, a former Chair of (1) the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility and (2) the ABA Section of Litigation, has identified what he considers…
Continue Reading
Previous441442443444445446447Next

Recent Posts

United States Trinity Energy Servs., L.L.C. v. Se. Directional Drilling, L.L.C., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 10178 (5th Cir. Apr. 28, 2025): FRAP 38 Separate Motion Requirement FRAP 38 Sanctions Properly Denied for Want of Separate Motion — Request in Brief Insufficient — “Manifest Disregard” Is Not A Freestanding Ground for Vacatur of Arbitration Award in Fifth Circuit (Or First, Eighth Or Eleventh)

§ 1927 Sanctions Apt for Failing to Withdraw Claim Until Summary Judgment Hearing, Requiring Opponent and Court to Prepare for An Abandoned Argument — Bad Faith Established by False and Misleading Statements to Court — Raising New Argument for First Time in Reply Brief Does Not Warrant § 1927 Sanctions

RICO: Mail and Wire Fraud: Act of Emailing Transcript of Court Proceedings Containing Allegedly False Statements Made in Court ≠ Wire Fraud — Mailing (Serving on Opposing Party) Declarations Allegedly Containing False Statements ≠ Mail Fraud

Supreme Court: (1) Rule 11 Sanctions Available Where Affirmative Defense “Obviously Applies” and Plaintiff/Plaintiff’s Counsel “Lack A Good Faith Basis to Believe Otherwise” — (2) If Affirmative Defense Pled, Court May Require Plaintiff to File a Reply to the Answer Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a) Setting forth “Specific, Nonconclusory Factual Allegations” Showing That The Affirmative Defense Does Not Apply — (3) The Title of a Statute And The Heading of a Section May Properly Be Used to Interpret the Text

FRAP 38 Sanctions — Sixth Circuit Usually Declines to Impose FRAP 38 Sanctions Unless An Improper Purpose Was Behind the Appeal

FRAP 38: Permissible for Appeals Court to Affirm Sanctions But Deny FRAP 38 Sanctions for Appeal — A Defendant’s Voluntary Cessation of Complained of Behavior Does Not Moot a Case Unless It Is Clear That The Behavior Could Not Reasonably Be Expected to Recur

Rule 11: Violation of 21 Day Safe Harbor “Overlook[ed]” As Non-Prejudicial by First Circuit — “Rule 11 Monetary Sanctions Must Be Reasonable” (Good Quote) — Rule 11(c)(4) Requires Consideration of Offender’s Ability to Pay

Temporary Restraining Order = Preliminary Injunction: 3 Supreme Court Cases (TRO=PI x 3)

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions — Exclusion of Untimely Expert Report — Eighth Circuit’s 4-Factor Test

RICO: So Insubstantial A Claim As to Fail to Confer Subject Matter Jurisdiction

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