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

FRAP 38 Sanctions Appropriate for Appeal “Brought without the Slightest Chance of Success” and Which “Thus Should Not Have Been Brought at All” (Good Quote)

Beter v. Murdoch, 2019 WL 2537524 (2d Cir. June 20, 2019) (unpublished):     SUMMARY ORDER   Plaintiff-Appellant Petra Beter, formerly a photographer for Michael Bloomberg’s first mayoral campaign, appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing her lawsuit as ...
Beter v. Murdoch, 2019 WL 2537524 (2d Cir. June 20, 2019) (unpublished):     SUMMARY ORDER   Plaintiff-Appellant Petra Beter, formerly a photographer for Michael Bloomberg’s first mayoral campaign, appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing her lawsuit asserting various causes …
Continue Reading

RICO Enterprise: Association Not Distinct from Association-in-Fact Composed of Ass’n + Its Members — Head of Ass’n Is Distinct from Ass’n

 Llacua v. W. Range Ass'n, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20965 (10th Cir. July 16, 2019): I. INTRODUCTION Five Peruvian shepherds (the "Shepherds")
Llacua v. W. Range Ass'n, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20965 (10th Cir. July 16, 2019): I. INTRODUCTION Five Peruvian shepherds (the "Shepherds")1 who worked in the Western United States pursuant to H-2A agricultural visas2 brought antitrust3 claims, …
Continue Reading

§ 1782: Where Foreign Case Over, Fact Discovery May Permit Reopening Likely Not “For Use” — Foreign View Applicant’s Claims Totally Lack Merit Relevant to “Receptivity” — Can Magistrate Judge Decide 1782s? (See Dissent)

Khrapunov v. Prosyankin, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22062 (9th Cir. July 24, 2019):
Khrapunov v. Prosyankin, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22062 (9th Cir. July 24, 2019): 28 U.S.C. § 1782 authorizes, but does not require, federal district courts to assist in the production of evidence for use in a foreign or international tribunal.…
Continue Reading

While Magistrate Judges May Not Impose Rule 11 Sanctions in the Second Circuit [& Can Only Issue R&Rs], They May Impose Monetary [& Other Non-Dispositive] Rule 37 Sanctions

 Errant Gene Therapeutics, LLC v. Sloan-Kettering Inst. for Cancer Research, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 15860 (2d Cir. May 29, 2019) (unpublished): SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERAT ...
Errant Gene Therapeutics, LLC v. Sloan-Kettering Inst. for Cancer Research, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 15860 (2d Cir. May 29, 2019) (unpublished): SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions: Frivolousness Standard Unmet Because “Claims Were Not Disposed of So Easily As to Make Them Frivolous” (Good Quote)PER CURIAM:

Gatti v. Goodman, 2019 WL 3213887 (11t Cir. July 17, 2019) (unpublished): *1 Appellants Lou Gatti and Twin Palms, Inc., appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Appellees Helen Goodman, Cliff Goodman, and Twin Palms Resort in this property dispute case. Federal court jurisdiction is based on diversit ...
Gatti v. Goodman, 2019 WL 3213887 (11t Cir. July 17, 2019) (unpublished): *1 Appellants Lou Gatti and Twin Palms, Inc., appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Appellees Helen Goodman, Cliff Goodman, and Twin Palms Resort in this…
Continue Reading

§ 1782 — Tag Service = “Found” — Signatory to Hague Evidence Convention Likely Receptive to U.S. Discovery — When Is Action “Within Reasonable Contemplation”? — Discovery from Anticipated Defendant Inappropriate

 Sandra Holding v. Fawzi, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116920 (D. Mass. July 15, 2019): I. Introduction The petitioner, Sandra Holding Ltd. (Sandra Holding), seeks permission to obtain dis ...
Sandra Holding v. Fawzi, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116920 (D. Mass. July 15, 2019): I. Introduction The petitioner, Sandra Holding Ltd. (Sandra Holding), seeks permission to obtain discovery in the United States for use in a foreign proceeding pursuant to…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Default Judgment for Defendant’s Failure to Comply with Court-Ordered Discovery — Disobedience “Not Shown to Be Outside Control of Litigant” = Willfulness, Bad Faith or Fault (Good Quote)

 Apriori Techs. v. Broquard, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 21963 (9th Cir. July 23, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Charles Jerome Broquard ap ...
Apriori Techs. v. Broquard, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 21963 (9th Cir. July 23, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Charles Jerome Broquard appeals pro se from the district court's default judgment and permanent injunction in plaintiff's diversity action alleging defamation, intentional interference …
Continue Reading

Rule 12(b)(1) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing Is a Facial Attack on Complaint and Considered under Same Standard as Rule 12(b)(6) Motion

 Willekes v. Serengeti Trading Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22214, 2019 WL 3335554 (3d Cir. July 25, 2019) (unpublished): These appeals arise from the District Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by a ...
Willekes v. Serengeti Trading Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22214, 2019 WL 3335554 (3d Cir. July 25, 2019) (unpublished): These appeals arise from the District Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by appellants George, Mark, and Robert Willekes, shareholders …
Continue Reading

§ 1782 — Person “Found” within District Only If Presence Satisfies Due Process As Articulated in Supreme Court’s Personal Jurisdiction Case Law (Goodyear, Daimler, et al.)

 In re Aso, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120873 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2019): MEMORANDUM ORDER JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge. On April 12, 2019, P ...
In re Aso, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120873 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2019): MEMORANDUM ORDER JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge. On April 12, 2019, Petitioner applied for an order to conduct discovery for use in foreign proceedings pursuant…
Continue Reading

RICO Conspiracy Claim Fails If Substantive Violation Inadequately Alleged

Manos v. MTC Fin’l, Inc., 2019 WL 3225991 (9th Cir. July 17, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM** *1 John Manos, Tara Borrelli, and Jessie Manos appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims arisi ...
Manos v. MTC Fin’l, Inc., 2019 WL 3225991 (9th Cir. July 17, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM** *1 John Manos, Tara Borrelli, and Jessie Manos appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims arising…
Continue Reading
Previous48495051525354Next

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