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

28 U.S.C. § 1782 Allows the Taking of Discovery for Use in a Foreign Commercial Arbitration — Circuit Split: 6th Cir. (Yes) vs. 2d & 5th Cirs. (No)

 Abdul Latif Jameel Transp. Co. v. FedEx Corp. (In re Application to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings), 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 28348 (6th Cir. Sept. 19, 2019): Thomas Jefferson once counseled hi ...
Abdul Latif Jameel Transp. Co. v. FedEx Corp. (In re Application to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings), 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 28348 (6th Cir. Sept. 19, 2019): Thomas Jefferson once counseled his nephew Peter Carr on how to…
Continue Reading

Daubert: Conclusion That X Is Prima Facie a Cause Of Y ≠ A Conclusion X Caused Y — Expert Must Apply The Methods Of His Or Her Discipline for Expert to Be Qualified to Testify As to Outcome

 In re Nat'l Prescription Opiate Litig., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146608 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2019): OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO EXCLUDE MARKETING CAUSATION OPINIO ...
In re Nat'l Prescription Opiate Litig., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146608 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2019): OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO EXCLUDE MARKETING CAUSATION OPINIONS OF SCHUMACHER, LEMBKE, AND KEYES Before the Court is Defendants' Motion…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege Does Not Cover Attorney’s Mental Impressions — Must Assert Work Product (Not Just Privilege) Or Lose Protection

 Burke v. Regalado, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 24806 (10th Cir. Aug. 20, 2019): Footnote 47.  The Sheriffs also contend the court erroneously permitted questions about [Attorney] Ms. Wyrick's thinking about t ...
Burke v. Regalado, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 24806 (10th Cir. Aug. 20, 2019): Footnote 47.  The Sheriffs also contend the court erroneously permitted questions about [Attorney] Ms. Wyrick's thinking about the email [as to which privilege was forfeited because it…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Call from Prisoner to Sister Relaying Message for Attorney Not Privileged Where Prisoner on Notice Calls Were Monitored and Sister Not Essential to Effective Communication with Lawyer — Communication Not in Confidence

 United States v. Mejia, 655 F.3d 126 (2d Cir. 2011): Defendant-Appellant Joel Rodriguez ("Rodriguez") appeals from a judgment of conviction entered on June 30, 2010, by Judge Denise Cote of the Un ...
United States v. Mejia, 655 F.3d 126 (2d Cir. 2011): Defendant-Appellant Joel Rodriguez ("Rodriguez") appeals from a judgment of conviction entered on June 30, 2010, by Judge Denise Cote of the United States District Court for the Southern District of…
Continue Reading

Exceptional Case Fees Per 28 U.S.C. §285 Require Winning — Even If District Court Found Litigation Misconduct, Fees Can’t Be Sustained on Appeal as Sanctions If Not Awarded as Sxs — Hiring Judge’s Ex-Partner to Disqualify = Litigation Misconduct

UCP Int’l Co. v. Balsam Brands Inc., 2019 WL 4509162 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 19, 2019): *1 The instant appeal is the companion to concurrently issuing Appeal No. 18-1256 (“the Merits Appeal”), where we determined that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California misconstrued the “pivot joint” cla ...
UCP Int’l Co. v. Balsam Brands Inc., 2019 WL 4509162 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 19, 2019): *1 The instant appeal is the companion to concurrently issuing Appeal No. 18-1256 (“the Merits Appeal”), where we determined that the U.S. District Court for…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power: in Exceptional Case, Bad Faith Conduct at Issue in Case May Be Sanctioned — Unless Appeal Is Sanctionable, Fact It Arises Out of Such Conduct Irrelevant — 28 U.S.C. §2412 Codifies Inherent Power, Waives Sovereign U.S.’s Immunity

Luther v. United States, 2019 WL 1645983 (5th Cir. Apr. 17, 2019): *1 The Equal Access to Justice Act,
Luther v. United States, 2019 WL 1645983 (5th Cir. Apr. 17, 2019): *1 The Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b), waives the government’s sovereign immunity for the imposition of attorneys’ fees “to the same extent that…
Continue Reading

RICO: Plaintiff Must Plead Specifics as to Each Defendant, No “Lumping” (Good Quote) — Conclusory Allegations of Enterprise Insufficient — No Threat of Continuing Criminal Activity when Everything Occurs in Connection with a Trial

Walker v. Beaumont Independent Sch. Dist., 2019 WL 4458378 (5th Cir. Sept. 18, 2019): *1 With this appeal, we review the district court’s dismissal of the entirety of Appellants’ claims pursuant to the Texas Citizens’ Participation Act, (“TCPA”),
Walker v. Beaumont Independent Sch. Dist., 2019 WL 4458378 (5th Cir. Sept. 18, 2019): *1 With this appeal, we review the district court’s dismissal of the entirety of Appellants’ claims pursuant to the Texas Citizens’ Participation Act, (“TCPA”), TEX. CIV. …
Continue Reading

Even After All Parties Have Consented to Plenary Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge, Only District Judge May Rule on Motion to Withdraw Consent to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge — Circuit Split

   Branch v. Umphenour, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26784 (9th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019): Appellant Louis Branch, a prisoner in the California state prison system, brought this pro se suit alleging civil ...
Branch v. Umphenour, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26784 (9th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019): Appellant Louis Branch, a prisoner in the California state prison system, brought this pro se suit alleging civil rights violations by various prison officials. After the conclusion …
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions—While Court May Sanction for Noncompliance with Order, It Is Not Required to (Good Quote) — Rooker-Feldman Inapplicable to Independent Claim, Even If It Denies State Court Legal Conclusion in Case to Which Plaintiff Was Party

Williams v. Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., 2019 WL 4187363 (11th Cir. Sept. 4, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: *1 Troy Williams appeals the dismissal of his Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claims against Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., and the entry of summary judgment on his FCRA claims against Equifax Informati ...
Williams v. Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., 2019 WL 4187363 (11th Cir. Sept. 4, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: *1 Troy Williams appeals the dismissal of his Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claims against Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., and the…
Continue Reading

Expert Testimony: Whether Judge Applied Proper Legal Framework Reviewed De Novo — If So, Abuse of Discretion for Decision — While Daubert Doesn’t Bar Generalist from Specialized Opinions, S/he Must Be Qualified for Each One

 United States v. Truitt, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 27497 (7th Cir. Sept. 12, 2019): In late 2009 Cathy Truitt filed seven nearly identical tax returns, each falsely claiming that she was entitled to a $3 ...
United States v. Truitt, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 27497 (7th Cir. Sept. 12, 2019): In late 2009 Cathy Truitt filed seven nearly identical tax returns, each falsely claiming that she was entitled to a $300,000 refund. The IRS identified six …
Continue Reading
Previous43444546474849Next

Recent Posts

Electronic Spoliation/Rule 37(e): (1) Finding of Recklessness But Neither Gross Negligence Nor Willfulness in Loss of Video Evidence Precludes Rule 37(e)(2)’s Severest Sanctions Because (i) No Intent to Deprive and (ii) Rule 37(e)(2) Displaces District Court’s Power to Invoke Inherent Power to Impose Those Sanctions — (2) Appellate Review = Abuse of Discretion, With The Caveat That Whether The District Court Applied The Correct Legal Standards Is Reviewed De Novo — (3) Inherent Power Is Often Available As An Alternate Source of Sanctioning Power But Can Be Limited by Rule or Statute, Something Which Courts Do Not Lightly Presume — (4) The Text of Rule 37(e)(2), As Confirmed by the Advisory Committee Note, Displaces Inherent Power to Impose the Sanctions Specified in the Rule or Any More Severe Sanctions — (5) “Intent to Deprive” in Rule 37(e)(2) = “The Willful Destruction Of Evidence With The Purpose Of Avoiding Its Discovery By An Adverse Party” — (6) Appellate Standing Conferred by Virtue of Issuance of Sanctions Regardless of Merits Outcome — (7) Value of Advisory Committee Notes in Interpreting Rules Enacted without Change Despite General Reticence to Rely on Legislative History

RICO: (1) Plaintiff Need Not Suffer Injury from Each Predicate Act to Establish Standing, And The Pattern May Include Predicates As to Which No Plaintiff Has Standing — (2) 7 Elements of a Civil RICO Claim (2d Circuit Articulation) Which Must Be Established As to Each Defendant — (3) Requirements of an Association-in-Fact Enterprise — (4) Each Defendant Must Personally Commit 2 or More Predicate Acts — (5) Pattern of Racketeering Activity: Horizontal and Vertical Elements — (6) No Requirement That All Members of a RICO Enterprise Joined at Inception — Can Join Over Time/Others Can Quit — (7) Cannot Charge 2 Predicate Acts Where One Action Violates Two Statutes — (8) A Footnote to Consider for Briefs: “Unless Otherwise Noted, When Quoting Judicial Decisions This Order Accepts All Alterations And Omits All Citations, Footnotes, And Internal Quotation Marks.”

For An Appeal to Be Timely, A Motion for Reconsideration in The District Court (A Rule 59(e) Motion) Must Be Filed, And Not Just Served within 30 Days of The Decision, to Toll The 30-Day Period for Filing An Appeal

There Is No Good-Faith Defense For Issuing An Overly Burdensome Subpoena

Purposes of Rule 37 and Section 1927 Sanctions

While Rule 11 Doesn’t Apply to Appellate Proceedings (Unless It Has Been Incorporated in Local Appellate Rules), Rule 11 Caselaw Is Looked to for Guidance in Interpreting Applicable Sanctions Powers on Appeal

Rule 11 Sanctions & Appellate Review: Abuse of Discretion Standard Applies Unless Sanctions Are Based Solely (Not Just in Part) on Legal Issues, in Which Case Review Is De Novo

Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions for Altering Expert’s 26(a)(2)(B) Report — Without the Expert’s Knowledge or Approval — by Converting It from PDF to Word, Changing Headings and Other Formatting, and Omitting a Page of Relevant Text and Appendices, Even Though Expert Testified That The Overall Substance of the Report Was Unchanged — Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions May Be Reversed If Failure to Comply with Discovery Order Was Due to Misunderstanding or Inability to Comply

Spoliation: Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) Imposes a Higher Standard — Intent — Than Fourth Circuit Law Previously Applied to Spoliation of Electronically-Stored Information (And Still Does As to Non-ESI) — Willfulness vs. Intent

Inherent Power and § 1927 Sanctions: Removal of counsel from case, referral for disciplinary action, and award of fees and costs for assaulting opposing counsel at deposition — Failure to request hearing waive any right to a hearing — Notice and opportunity to be heard required before sua sponte sanctions imposed, whether under Rule 11, the inherent power of the court or § 1927 — Notice may come from court or opposing counsel — Order imposing sanctions cannot provide notice of sanctions — Nature of bad faith requirement for inherent power sanctions: bad faith to obstruct the judicial process or bring about violation of a court order — Sanctions proceeding need not defer (Younger abstention) to disciplinary proceeding involving the same conduct — Sanctions proceeding doesn’t threaten to interfere with disciplinary proceeding — Why District Court is accorded significant deference in matters concerning attorney’s fees

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