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

Diversity Loopholes

The Federal diversity jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, provides for Federal jurisdiction in cases involving more than $75,000 between ‛(1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state; (3) citizens of different States…in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a fo ...
The Federal diversity jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, provides for Federal jurisdiction in cases involving more than $75,000 between ‛(1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state; (3) citizens…
Continue Reading

More on Pre-Action Discovery

Yesterday’s Blog discussed pre-action discovery under Rule 27 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the New York statute, CPLR § 3102(c). Other states have pre-action discovery rules that may permit even more searching discovery prior to the filing of a complaint. Texas, for example, adopted its pre-action discovery rule effective January 1999. Rule 202 ...
Yesterday’s Blog discussed pre-action discovery under Rule 27 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the New York statute, CPLR § 3102(c). Other states have pre-action discovery rules that may permit even more searching discovery prior to the filing…
Continue Reading

Pre-Action Discovery

When it comes to seeking and obtaining discovery prior to commencement of an action, there may be significant differences between the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the procedures in State court, where available. In Federal practice, Rule 27 allows pre-action discovery, but only where the discovery is sought in order to ‛perpetuate testimony regarding [a] m ...
When it comes to seeking and obtaining discovery prior to commencement of an action, there may be significant differences between the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the procedures in State court, where available. In Federal practice, Rule 27 allows…
Continue Reading

Conflicts of Laws — Choosing the ‘Right’ Law

Choice of law can lead to some thorny, but important, issues. In Federal cases with state law claims based on diversity or supplemental jurisdiction, the Federal court will look to the conflicts of laws rules of the forum state. See, e.g., Klaxon v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487, 495-97 (1941) (diversity); Bancoklahoma Mtg. Corp. v. Capital Title Co., Inc., ...
Choice of law can lead to some thorny, but important, issues. In Federal cases with state law claims based on diversity or supplemental jurisdiction, the Federal court will look to the conflicts of laws rules of the forum state. See,…
Continue Reading

Recusal — Reconsideration

There is a split in the Circuits was to whether a federal district judge may reconsider a decision to recuse. Compare Doddy v. OXY USA, Inc., 101 F.3d 448, 458 (5th Cir. 1996) (no) with United States v. Lauersen, 348 F.3d 329, 338 (2d Cir. 2003) (yes). See also Chief Judge Thomas Hogan’s recent decision in United States v. Pineda, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22300 (D. ...
There is a split in the Circuits was to whether a federal district judge may reconsider a decision to recuse. Compare Doddy v. OXY USA, Inc., 101 F.3d 448, 458 (5th Cir. 1996) (no) with United States v. Lauersen, 348…
Continue Reading

Expert Testimony — Abuse of Discretion — Reversal

Reversal of a trial judge’s decision on expert testimony is uncommon. The legal construct governing review — abuse of discretion — weighs heavily in favor of affirmance. The trial judge in United States v. Sandoval-Mendoza, 472 F.3d 645 (9th Cir. 2006), excluded expert testimony offered by the defendant concerning his mental condition and susceptibility to s ...
Reversal of a trial judge’s decision on expert testimony is uncommon. The legal construct governing review — abuse of discretion — weighs heavily in favor of affirmance. The trial judge in United States v. Sandoval-Mendoza, 472 F.3d 645 (9th Cir.…
Continue Reading

Limits of Federal Securities Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction under the federal securities laws, 15 USC §§ 77v and 78aa, does not extend to state law claims brought by a receiver to collect the proceeds of securities violations, under Judge Jerry Buchmeyer's decision in Warfield v. Arpe, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12177 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 22, 2007). ...
Jurisdiction under the federal securities laws, 15 USC §§ 77v and 78aa, does not extend to state law claims brought by a receiver to collect the proceeds of securities violations, under Judge Jerry Buchmeyer’s decision in Warfield v. Arpe, 2007…
Continue Reading

Securities — What Is the Significance of the Choice of Cert Grant?

Is there any significance to the fact that the Supreme Court granted cert to review the Eighth Circuit decision, which affirmed dismissal on a traditional Central Bank analysis (Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 443 F.3d 987 (8th Cir. 2006)), rather than the Ninth Circuit decision which adopted the SEC’s substantial-participation ...
Is there any significance to the fact that the Supreme Court granted cert to review the Eighth Circuit decision, which affirmed dismissal on a traditional Central Bank analysis (Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 443 F.3d 987 (8th Cir.…
Continue Reading

Taxations of Costs — Video, Expedited Transcripts, ASCII Disks

For a thorough discussion of taxation and apportionment of costs, burden of proof, and apportionment among parties — including specific discussion of taxation of video depositions (and whether they need be used at trial), expedited deposition transcripts (and the circumstances in which the cost is taxable), and related deposition costs — see the opinion of Magis ...
For a thorough discussion of taxation and apportionment of costs, burden of proof, and apportionment among parties — including specific discussion of taxation of video depositions (and whether they need be used at trial), expedited deposition transcripts (and the circumstances…
Continue Reading
Previous501502503504505506507Next

Recent Posts

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

FRAP 38 Sanctions for Frivolous Opposition to Arbitration

Extrinsic Fraud Exception to Rooker-Feldman — Where Defendants’ Perjury, False Evidence, Flawed Legal Arguments Prevented Plaintiffs from Presenting Their Claim in State Court

Federal Jurisdiction: Party Can Waive Subject Matter Jurisdiction — While Federal Courts Must Ensure They Do Not Lack Subject Matter Jurisdiction, There Is No Duty to Find and Exercise It

“RICO Is a Judge’s Nightmare” — “The Requisite RICO Pleading Standards Are Far From Explicit, And The RICO Jurisprudence Offers Courts (And Plaintiffs) Little Guidance” (Good Quotes) — Common Elements of § 1962(a), (c) and (d)-Based Claims — Closed-End Continuity: Duration > 1 Year = Substantial Period of Time — Continuity: Courts Skeptical If Number of Victims and Schemes Is Limited — Untargeted Persons Who Suffer Derivative Injury Do Not Add to the Number of Victims Considered for Continuity Purposes — Open Ended Continuity Can Be Established by Showing Defendant Commits Predicate Acts As “Regular Way of Doing Business” — Citing the Existence of Other Lawsuits Alleging Similar Predicates ≠ Pleading Facts Demonstrating Defendant’s Commission of Similar Predicates Against Others

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