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

Chevron Deference and the Arbitrary-and-Capricious Standard

From Wright v. Everson, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 20177 (11th Cir. Sept. 24, 2008): "When a court reviews an agency's construction of the statute which it administers, it is confronted with two questions." Chevron, 467 U.S. at 842, 104 S. Ct. at 2781. First, always, is the question whether Congress has directly ...
From Wright v. Everson, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 20177 (11th Cir. Sept. 24, 2008): “When a court reviews an agency’s construction of the statute which it administers, it is confronted with two questions.” Chevron, 467 U.S. at 842, 104 S.…
Continue Reading

Standing to Assert RICO Claims Passes to Bankruptcy Estate on Filing Bankruptcy

Individual mortgagors sued financial institutions for deceiving them into taking out inflated mortgages which they could not afford, precipitating their bankruptcy, in Roberts v. First Bank of Delaware, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71266 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 19, 2008): [D]efendants argue that plaintiffs lack standing because any RICO claims they pos ...
Individual mortgagors sued financial institutions for deceiving them into taking out inflated mortgages which they could not afford, precipitating their bankruptcy, in Roberts v. First Bank of Delaware, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71266 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 19, 2008): [D]efendants argue…
Continue Reading

No Federal Jurisdiction under Grable If Adequate and Independent Bases for Liability Exist under State Law

The Defendants argued in their notice of removal in Martinez v. City of Faiurfield, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73746 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 12, 2008), that federal question jurisdiction existed because the plaintiff alleged that the defendant police officer exceeded his authority under the U.S. Constitution and because the plaintiff’s Sixth and Seventh Causes of Action ...
The Defendants argued in their notice of removal in Martinez v. City of Faiurfield, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73746 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 12, 2008), that federal question jurisdiction existed because the plaintiff alleged that the defendant police officer exceeded his…
Continue Reading

Prolix Pleading as “Novelette” — Good Quote

From Fezzani v. Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71943 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23, 2008): Plaintiffs filed their first Amended Complaint on April 7, 2005. It is not so much a pleading as it is a novelette, 113 pages long with 357 separately numbered paragraphs. It layers allegations of various kinds, involving different ...
From Fezzani v. Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71943 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23, 2008): Plaintiffs filed their first Amended Complaint on April 7, 2005. It is not so much a pleading as it is a novelette, 113…
Continue Reading

Is the Jury’s Attention Spam No Longer than One Commercial Break? Ten-Minute Limit on Opening Statements

From Faulman v. Security Mut. Fin. Life Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71227 (D.N.J. Sept. 12, 2008), on plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial: Plaintiffs argue that the Court's decision, after jury selection, to impose a ten-minute limitation on the parties' opening statements, on the basis that "jurors cannot absorb a long speech" (Tri ...
From Faulman v. Security Mut. Fin. Life Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71227 (D.N.J. Sept. 12, 2008), on plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial: Plaintiffs argue that the Court’s decision, after jury selection, to impose a ten-minute limitation on…
Continue Reading

How a Federal Court Is to Approach an Issue of First Impression of State Law

From Casanova v. Marathon Corp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72571 (D.D.C. Sept. 24, 2008): Confronted with a case of first impression, the federal courts are to "endeavor to discover the law of the state on the point at issue by considering related decisions, decisions of other jurisdictions, analogies and any reliable data tending to convinc ...
From Casanova v. Marathon Corp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72571 (D.D.C. Sept. 24, 2008): Confronted with a case of first impression, the federal courts are to “endeavor to discover the law of the state on the point at issue by…
Continue Reading

Ballistics, Like Fingerprint, Evidence — Non-Scientific but Nonetheless Admissible under Daubert

From United States v. Glynn, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72505 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2008) (Rakoff, J.): Building on a ruling it had made two weeks earlier in another trial involving ballistics testimony, United States v. Damian Brown et al., 05 Cr. 538, th[is] Court, following a "Daubert" hearing, ruled from the bench that Valenti ...
From United States v. Glynn, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72505 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2008) (Rakoff, J.): Building on a ruling it had made two weeks earlier in another trial involving ballistics testimony, United States v. Damian Brown et al., 05…
Continue Reading

Standard of Review Under the Administrative Procedure Act

From Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Kempthorne, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69802 (D.D.C. Sept. 15, 2008): Under the APA, federal agency actions are to be held unlawful and set aside where they are "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). While this standard ...
From Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Kempthorne, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69802 (D.D.C. Sept. 15, 2008): Under the APA, federal agency actions are to be held unlawful and set aside where they are “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise…
Continue Reading

RICO Standing — Creditor Lacks Standing to Sue Until Collateral and All Alternative Sources of Recovery Are Exhausted

From Harbinger Capital Partners Master Fund I, Ltd. v. Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67462 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 26, 2008): [1. RICO Standing vs. Article III Standing.] [E]stablishing "RICO standing is a more rigorous matter than [establishing] standing under Article III." Denney v. Deutsche Bank AG, 44 ...
From Harbinger Capital Partners Master Fund I, Ltd. v. Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67462 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 26, 2008): [1. RICO Standing vs. Article III Standing.] [E]stablishing “RICO standing is a more rigorous matter than [establishing] standing…
Continue Reading

Website Evidence — Judicial Notice of Data on Government Website

From Paralyzed Veterans of Am. v. McPherson, 2008 Sept. Dist. Sept 69542 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 8, 2008): The plaintiffs request the Court take judicial notice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201(b)(2), of two documents that appeared on the [California] Secretary of State's Internet website. The first is a December 6, 2007 letter approvi ...
From Paralyzed Veterans of Am. v. McPherson, 2008 Sept. Dist. Sept 69542 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 8, 2008): The plaintiffs request the Court take judicial notice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201(b)(2), of two documents that appeared on the [California]…
Continue Reading
Previous450451452453454455456Next

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