Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Complex Lit Blog

The defendant in United States v. Gagliardi, 506 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2007), used email and instant messaging to attempt to entice a minor into prohibited activity. Appealing his conviction, he contended that the electronic communications were inadequately authenticated by testimony of an informant and government agent. Rejecting the contention, the Second Circuit st ...
The defendant in United States v. Gagliardi, 506 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2007), used email and instant messaging to attempt to entice a minor into prohibited activity. Appealing his conviction, he contended that the electronic communications were inadequately authenticated by…
To be sanctionable under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, counsel's conduct must multiply the proceedings both ``unreasonably and vexatiously.'' What is “reasonabl[e]” in the context of a question of first impression? A plausible position. Under Lira v Arrow Air, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88751 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 28, 2007), § 1927 sanctions are inappropriate for a ...
To be sanctionable under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, counsel’s conduct must multiply the proceedings both “unreasonably and vexatiously.” What is “reasonabl[e]” in the context of a question of first impression? A plausible position. Under Lira v Arrow Air, Inc., 2007…
Disqualification is contagious. On December 13, 2007, the California Supreme Court upheld disqualification of the attorneys and experts for the plaintiff in RICO v. Mitsubishi Motors Corp, No. S123808, 2007 Cal. LEXIS 13892 (Cal. Dec. 13, 2007) because plaintiffs’ counsel reviewed, used (in deposition) and shared with plaintiffs’ experts a document containing t ...
Disqualification is contagious. On December 13, 2007, the California Supreme Court upheld disqualification of the attorneys and experts for the plaintiff in RICO v. Mitsubishi Motors Corp, No. S123808, 2007 Cal. LEXIS 13892 (Cal. Dec. 13, 2007) because plaintiffs’ counsel…
After a party files a notice of appeal, does the district court retain jurisdiction to sanction? The question is whether the sanctions issue is collateral to the matters on appeal (it usually is). In Briggs v. Briggs, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29712 (11th Cir. Dec. 19, 2007) (unpublished), the Eleventh Circuit held that: “Because the issue of whether [counsel ...
After a party files a notice of appeal, does the district court retain jurisdiction to sanction? The question is whether the sanctions issue is collateral to the matters on appeal (it usually is). In Briggs v. Briggs, 2007 U.S. App.…
The plaintiff in Lowery v. Blue Steel Releasing, Inc., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29896 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2007), alleged that the defendants induced him by fraud to invest $75,000 by wire transfer in Blue Steel. The Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal of the RICO claim due to the RICO Bar enacted as part of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("no person m ...
The plaintiff in Lowery v. Blue Steel Releasing, Inc., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29896 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2007), alleged that the defendants induced him by fraud to invest $75,000 by wire transfer in Blue Steel. The Ninth Circuit affirmed…
The defendant in Kartman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94699 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 21, 2007), served discovery demands on plaintiffs requesting the documents obtained by plaintiffs' counsel in their investigation. In that investigation, counsel gathered numerous documents from publicly available sources, including from Defendant State Farm's ow ...
The defendant in Kartman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94699 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 21, 2007), served discovery demands on plaintiffs requesting the documents obtained by plaintiffs’ counsel in their investigation. In that investigation, counsel…
1. Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007). No one can possibly know what Rule 8(a)(2) means any more. Before Twombly, courts would occasionally find complaints too long and detailed to satisfy the “short and plain statement of the case” requirement of Rule 8(a)(2). Twombly then proceeded to read Rule 8(a)(2) as requiring ...
1. Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007). No one can possibly know what Rule 8(a)(2) means any more. Before Twombly, courts would occasionally find complaints too long and detailed to satisfy the “short and plain statement of…
The plaintiffs’ expert in Boim v. Holy Land Foundation, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29864 (7th Cir. Dec. 28, 2007), relied in part on internet website postings in which the terrorist organization Hamas took credit for the murder of plaintiffs’ decedent. The panel majority ruled that the expert failed sufficiently to elucidate the basis for his conclusion that t ...
The plaintiffs’ expert in Boim v. Holy Land Foundation, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29864 (7th Cir. Dec. 28, 2007), relied in part on internet website postings in which the terrorist organization Hamas took credit for the murder of plaintiffs’ decedent.…
Toussie v. County of Suffolk, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93988 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2007): • “In general, the obligation to preserve evidence arises when [a] party has notice that the evidence is relevant to litigation or when a party should have known that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation." • “At times, th ...
Toussie v. County of Suffolk, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93988 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2007): • “In general, the obligation to preserve evidence arises when [a] party has notice that the evidence is relevant to litigation or when a party should…

Recent Posts

Archives