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

Expert Testimony on Class Certification

We have previously noted the apparently differing standards used in applying Daubert at the class certification stage. See our post of February 11, 2007, contrasting opinions of the Second and Ninth Circuits. The question in In re Katrina Canal Breaches Consol. Litig., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82887 (E.D. La. Nov. 1, 2007), was whether expert testimony ...
We have previously noted the apparently differing standards used in applying Daubert at the class certification stage. See our post of February 11, 2007, contrasting opinions of the Second and Ninth Circuits. The question in In re Katrina Canal Breaches…
Continue Reading

Experts — Abusive Supplementation — Destruction of Notes Sometimes Forgiveable

The defendant's expert in Sandata Techs., Inc. v. Infocrossing, Inc., , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85176 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2007), prepared a supplemental report that had not been delivered to the other side prior to his deposition, but was handed across the table when it was referred to. Another voluminous supplemental report was delivered on the last day of exp ...
The defendant’s expert in Sandata Techs., Inc. v. Infocrossing, Inc., , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85176 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2007), prepared a supplemental report that had not been delivered to the other side prior to his deposition, but was handed…
Continue Reading

RICO — Damage to Business or Property

The four part standing test for a civil RICO claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) requires that (i) a person allege (ii) injury to (iii) business or property (iv) by reason of a violation of §1962(a), (b), (c) or (d). Therefore, if the plaintiff cannot allege injury to business or property, the plaintiff lacks standing to sue. It is well settled that personal injurie ...
The four part standing test for a civil RICO claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) requires that (i) a person allege (ii) injury to (iii) business or property (iv) by reason of a violation of §1962(a), (b), (c) or (d).…
Continue Reading

Expert Testimony as to the Infirmity of Eyewitness Testimony

Last Thursday, November 15, 2007, The Wall Street Journal reported at page D1 an "alarming" increase in the number of home invasion robberies. In a related development, in a recent a 2 to 1 decision, Ferensic v. Birkett, 501 F.3d 469 (6th Cir. 2007), the Sixth Circuit overturned an armed robbery and home invasion conviction because of the exclusion of ...
Last Thursday, November 15, 2007, The Wall Street Journal reported at page D1 an “alarming” increase in the number of home invasion robberies. In a related development, in a recent a 2 to 1 decision, Ferensic v. Birkett, 501 F.3d…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Attorneys’ Fees — How Much Is Too Much?

The question in CS Stars LLC v. First AllAmerica Fin. Life Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83738 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2007), was not whether sanctions should be awarded (that had been decided earlier) but whether the attorneys' fees request was too high. The sanctioned party argued that opposing counsel had over-lawyered the offense and that the request shou ...
The question in CS Stars LLC v. First AllAmerica Fin. Life Ins. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83738 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2007), was not whether sanctions should be awarded (that had been decided earlier) but whether the attorneys’ fees…
Continue Reading

Spoliation Factoid

‛The concept of spoliation derives from the Latin phrase ‘contra spolatorem omnia praesumuntur,’ meaning ‘all things presumed against the destroyer.’“ Perez v. La Dove, Inc., 964 So. 2d 777 (Fla. App. 2007) (citing Maria A. Losavio, Synthesis of Louisiana Law on Spoliation of Evidence-Compared to the Rest of the Country, Did We Handle it Corre ...
‛The concept of spoliation derives from the Latin phrase ‘contra spolatorem omnia praesumuntur,’ meaning ‘all things presumed against the destroyer.’“ Perez v. La Dove, Inc., 964 So. 2d 777 (Fla. App. 2007) (citing Maria A. Losavio, Synthesis of Louisiana Law…
Continue Reading

Discovery — Electronic Spoliation — Strategic Objections & Capitulation — Change of Witness Testimony at Deposition Break

A lot of discovery abuse was found by the Court in Wood Group Pressure Control, LP v. B&B Oilfield Servs., Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83708 (E.D. La. April 27, 2007). Useful points: 1. Degrading Data to Backup Tapes as Spoliation. Defense counsel never implemented a litigation hold. As a result, emails were deleted from activ ...
A lot of discovery abuse was found by the Court in Wood Group Pressure Control, LP v. B&B Oilfield Servs., Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83708 (E.D. La. April 27, 2007). Useful points: 1. Degrading Data to Backup Tapes as…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction — § 1447(d) Bars Review of Order Declining Supplemental Jurisdiction under § 1367(c)

28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) provides that "[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise." Under Thermatron Prods., Inc. v. Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336 (1976), the jurisdictional bar of § 1447(d) is limited to the grounds enumerated in § 1447(c). The question of first impression in HIF Bio, In ...
28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) provides that “[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise.” Under Thermatron Prods., Inc. v. Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336 (1976), the jurisdictional bar…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 — Duty to Inquire — Irrelevance of Signature — Duties of Local Counsel

A nightmare scenario. You are representing the foreign plaintiffs suing Texaco and Chevron for cancer caused by their Ecuadorian oil operations, and one your clients testify as follows: Q: Ms. [plaintiff], isn't it true that the first biopsy that was performed on you to see whether you had breast cancer was performed after April 2006? < ...
A nightmare scenario. You are representing the foreign plaintiffs suing Texaco and Chevron for cancer caused by their Ecuadorian oil operations, and one your clients testify as follows: Q: Ms. [plaintiff], isn’t it true that the first biopsy that was…
Continue Reading

H.R. 3013 — Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2007

The text of H.R. 3013, The Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2007, which was passed by House on Tuesday and which reverses the Holder/Thompson/McNulty Memo, can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c110:./temp/~c1107lxBfV. You can keep track of the status of the legislation in the Senate and with the President at http://www.govtrack.us/congre ...
The text of H.R. 3013, The Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2007, which was passed by House on Tuesday and which reverses the Holder/Thompson/McNulty Memo, can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c110:./temp/~c1107lxBfV. You can keep track of the status of the legislation…
Continue Reading
Previous478479480481482483484Next

Recent Posts

RICO: (1) Continuity: 4th Circuit Factors — (2) 4th Circuit Reserves RICO Liability for Unlawful Activities That Pose A Special Threat to Social Well-Being — (3) For Purposes of Determining Closed-Ended Continuity, Even Time-Barred Conduct Considered — (4) No Open-Ended Continuity If Racketeering Activity Has Built-In Ending Point — (5) Unlike General Federal Conspiracy, RICO Conspiracy Doesn’t Require Each Defendant to Perform an Overt Act in Furtherance of the Conspiracy

Whether Party Waived Arbitration by Litigating Is a Question for the Court, Not the Arbitrator

RICO: (1) Assignability of RICO Claims Uncertain — (2) Declining to Decide Whether Indirect-Purchaser Rule Applies to RICO (Given the Directness Requirement, How Much Does It Matter?) — (3) Two Types of Directness of Injury in Proximate Cause Analysis — (4) Proximate Cause As a Court Not Jury Issue in the First Instance

(1) RICO Pattern: Open-Ended Continuity — The Vendetta Exception — Jury Could Reasonably Infer That Scheme Directed at One Person, With Goal of Destroying His Current and Future Business Prospects, Presented A Threat of Continued Racketeering Activity Extending Indefinitely into the Future — Lawsuit’s “Fortuitous Interruption” of Scheme ≠ Lack of Threat of Continuing Racketeering Activity — Acts of Concealment Used to Perpetuate Violations — Multiple Schemes Not Required — Jury Could Judge Defendant’s Credibility in Assessing Threat of Continuing Criminal Activity — (2) RICO Conspiracy — Two Methods of Proof: Agreement to Overall Objective Or to Commit Predicate Acts — Agreement Can Be Inferred from Conduct — Conspirator Needn’t Know All Details, Have Contact with Other Conspirators Or Participate in Every Stage

Experts: “Normally, Courts Are Loath to Outright Dismiss An Expert” (Good Quote) — Experts Are Unhelpful If They Misstate the Law [Note Premise That Testimony on Law Not Precluded Outright] — Rule 37 Sanctions Unwarranted for Unjustifiable Failure to Produce Relevant Document Already in Requester’s Possession

FRAP 38 Sanctions: (1) Pressing Objectively Frivolous Arguments, Multiple Misstatements at Oral Argument and Failure to Address What District Judge Said Warrant Award against Appellants’ Counsel (Only) — (2) “General Award” of $5,000 Warranted Where Appellee Failed to Sufficiently Document Its Fees and Expenses [Goodyear v. Haegar Issue]]

RICO: Capital Call Investment Process Increasing Equity of Those Responding to Call at Expense of Those Not Responding ≠ Collection of An Unlawful Debt

RICO [And Constitutional] Standing: Concrete Injury Requirement Not Satisfied by Alleged Intangible Injuries of Intrusion Upon Seclusion, Confusion And Emotional Distress, Public Disclosure of Private Facts, Deterred Speech On Nondefamatory Matters, Violation Of First Amendment Rights, And Compulsion

Rule 37(b) Sanctions: Striking of Answer, Default Judgment, Civil Contempt and Piercing Corporate Veil for Deliberate Disregard of Multiple Orders to Produce — Finding of Deliberate Disregard of Court Order Is Factual, Triggering Clear Error Review — Discretion Narrows When Default Sanction Involved — Fourth Circuit Factors for Rule 37 Default Sanction Are Different Than Those for Inherent Power Dismissal Sanction — Continued Defiance of Court Orders And Millions in Unpaid Judgments And Tax Liens Render Lesser Sanctions Futile

RICO: No Causation for Company Harmed by Governmental Customers Shunning It After Employee Publishes Book Admitting He Bribed Governmental Officials — Harm Too Indirect, Not from Bribery (Predicate Act) But from Customers’ Decisions to Shun and Publication of Book (Both Lawful) — Customers Injured by Bribery of Their Officials Are More Direct Plaintiffs

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