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

§ 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 LEXIS 21963 (9th Cir. July 23, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Charles Jerome Broquard ap ...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 LEXIS 21963 (9th Cir. July 23, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Charles Jerome Broquard appeals pro se from the district court's default judgment and permanent injunction in plaintiff's diversity action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 LEXIS 22214, 2019 WL 3335554 (3d Cir. July 25, 2019) (unpublished): These appeals arise from the District Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by a ...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 LEXIS 22214, 2019 WL 3335554 (3d Cir. July 25, 2019) (unpublished): These appeals arise from the District Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by appellants George, Mark, and Robert Willekes, shareholders …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

Texts on Decedent’s Facebook Page Authenticated by Other Person’s Screen Name, Contents, Timing of Messages and Decedent’s Actions Consistent with Them

 State v. Green, 2019 S.C. App. LEXIS 55 (S.C. Ct. App. June 26, 2019): Convicted by a jury of murder and desecration of human remains, Fabian Lamichael R. Green appeals, challenging the trial court& ...
State v. Green, 2019 S.C. App. LEXIS 55 (S.C. Ct. App. June 26, 2019): Convicted by a jury of murder and desecration of human remains, Fabian Lamichael R. Green appeals, challenging the trial court's admission of a series of direct …
Continue Reading

Sanctions—Even Egregious Litigation Abuse Doesn’t Subject Non-Party (Corp. Officer) to Personal Liability for Amount of Claim against Party (Corp.) — Must Be Punished under Appropriate Sanctions Power

The plaintiff in this case, Life Technologies Corp., filed a complaint against another corporation of the same name (the defendant corporation, or the defendant), alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act,
The plaintiff in this case, Life Technologies Corp., filed a complaint against another corporation of the same name (the defendant corporation, or the defendant), alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A). The…
Continue Reading

Text/Email Authentication — Password / Passcode / Key Is Self-Authenticating If It Works to Unlock Cell Phone [or Other Device]

State v. Stahl, 206 So. 3d 124 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016):The State seeks a writ of certiorari quashing the trial court's order denying the State's motion to compel the production of the passcode to unlock Aaro ...
State v. Stahl, 206 So. 3d 124 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016):The State seeks a writ of certiorari quashing the trial court's order denying the State's motion to compel the production of the passcode to unlock Aaron Stahl's cellphone. We…
Continue Reading

Disqualification: “Questionable at Best” Whether Party Has Standing to Raise a Conflict between Opposing Parties & Their Counsel (Good Quote) — Speculation That Adversay “Knew” a Lawsuit Was Coming Not Enough for Spoliation Sanctions

 Plouffe v. Cevallos, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17603 (3d Cir. June 12, 2019) (unpublished): This is a [*5]  consolidated appeal of two employment-related civil actions stemming from William C. ...
Plouffe v. Cevallos, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17603 (3d Cir. June 12, 2019) (unpublished): This is a [*5]  consolidated appeal of two employment-related civil actions stemming from William C. Plouffe, Jr.'s firing by Kutztown University. The first action was against…
Continue Reading

Non-Signatory May Not Compel Arbitration under NY Convention (NYC) — While FAA Permits This If State Law Allows, If the FAA Allows What the NYC Prohibits, the NYC Controls

 Setty v. Shrinivas Sugandhalaya (BNG) LLP, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17071 (9th Cir. June 6, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Shrinivas Sug ...
Setty v. Shrinivas Sugandhalaya (BNG) LLP, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17071 (9th Cir. June 6, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Shrinivas Sugandhalaya LLP ("SS LLP"), an incense manufacturing company based in Mumbai, appeals the district court's order denying its motion to…
Continue Reading
Previous49505152535455Next

Recent Posts

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Abuse of Discretion Review = Legal Conclusions De Novo. Factual Findings for Clear Error — (2) Client May Be Sanctioned for Misconduct of Its Counsel, Though Here Client Was Directly Involved in Bad Faith Misbehavior — (3) Is There A Difference, Under Rule 11 As Opposed to Rule 37, Concerning Whether A Client Can Be Sanctioned for Its Counsel’s Misconduct? — (4) While Sanctions of Last Resort (Dismissal/Default) Are Apt Only If Lesser Sanctions Wouldn’t Ensure Compliance, Rule 37 Doesn’t Require the Vain Gesture of First Imposing Lessert Sanctions When It Is Clear They Would be Ineffective — (5) Court’s Reconsideration of Non-Final Orders Is Governed by Rule 54(b), And Court’s Discretion under That Rule Is Governed by the Law-of-the-Case-Doctrine

RICO: (1) Special Pleading Requirements? — (2) Although Enterprise Must Be More Than a Summation of the Predicate Acts, The Predicate Acts Can Demonstrate the Existence of the Enterprise — (3) Requirement That Association-in-Fact Exist For Purposes Other Than Just to Commit Predicate Acts Merely Requires Continuity — (4) To State an Association-in-Fact Enterprise Consisting of One Natural Person and Collection of Legal Fictions Requires Factual Detail As to How They Acted Together — (5) “A § 1962(c) Enterprise Must Be More Than An Association of Individuals Or Entities Conducting the Normal Affairs of a Defendant Corporation” (Good Quote)

RICO: (1) Fee Award May Exceed Amount Recovered — Strict Proportionality Not Required — (2) Nonmonetary Benefits and Injunctive Relief Recovered Also Relevant Factors — (3) Loss on Some Claims Need Not Result in Lowered Fees, Especially When Both Arise Out of The Same Nucleus of Operative Facts

RICO: Indirect Purchasers (Car Buyers/Renters) Lack Standing to Sue Manufacturers for RICO Violations Even Though Intermediaries (Auto Dealer Direct Purchasers) Lack Any Damages

RICO: Statutory Requirement that RICO Be Liberally Construed Does Not Establish a More Liberal Pleading Standard for RICO Claims — “To Be Sure, Adequately Pleading a RICO Claim Can Be Challenging” (Good Quote) — Court May Dismiss Action Pursuant to Rule 41(b) Absent A Motion

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

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