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

28 U.S.C. § 1782 — Foreign Recognition, Enforcement, Attachment & Garnishment Proceedings after Merits Decided Are Not “Adjudicative” & Thus Not “Proceedings” within §1782 — No Discovery Permitted

 In re Galaxy Energy & Res. Co. Pte. Ltd., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109718 (S.D.N.Y. July 1, 2019): Before the Court is the ex parte Petition of Galaxy Energy and Resources Co. Pte. Ltd. ("G ...
In re Galaxy Energy & Res. Co. Pte. Ltd., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109718 (S.D.N.Y. July 1, 2019): Before the Court is the ex parte Petition of Galaxy Energy and Resources Co. Pte. Ltd. ("Galaxy" or "Petitioner") seeking permission to …
Continue Reading

§1927 Sanctions — Failure to Withdraw Claim Despite Letter Identifying Flaws But Later Seeking to Do So When Same Flaws Are Identified to Court in Dismissal Motion Is Unreasonable and Vexatious within §1927

Coleman v. Oasis Outsourcing, Inc., 2019 WL 2913718 (11th Cir. July 8, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Brandon Coleman appeals the district court’s award of sanctions and grant of summary judgment to Oasis Outsourcing, Inc. (Oasis). Coleman asserts the district court abused its discretion when it determined Coleman’s failu ...
Coleman v. Oasis Outsourcing, Inc., 2019 WL 2913718 (11th Cir. July 8, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Brandon Coleman appeals the district court’s award of sanctions and grant of summary judgment to Oasis Outsourcing, Inc. (Oasis). Coleman asserts the district court…
Continue Reading

Daubert: Court Properly Excluded Testimony from Expert Whose Report Was Researched, Drafted by Counsel with Only Minimally Revisions by Expert — That Process “Substantially Detracts from His Testimony’s Reliability and Usefulness” (Good Quote)

Puppolo v. Welch, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18493, 2019 WL 2537526 (2d Cir. June 20, 2019) (unpublished): *1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS H ...
Puppolo v. Welch, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18493, 2019 WL 2537526 (2d Cir. June 20, 2019) (unpublished): *1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the order of the District Court be and hereby…
Continue Reading

Arbitration: Denial without Prejudice of Motion to Compel Arbitration Is Reviewable under the FAA, 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(B) — Striking Such a Motion on Technical Grounds, Maybe Not

 Griggs v. Kenworth of Montgomery, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 16786 (11th Cir. June 4, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Kenworth of Montgomery Inc. brings this interlocutory a ...
Griggs v. Kenworth of Montgomery, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 16786 (11th Cir. June 4, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Kenworth of Montgomery Inc. brings this interlocutory appeal under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. § 16, contending …
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Dismissal for Evading Answers at Dep (“Deliberate Obtuseness”), = Lying to Avoid Giving Evidence, “Essentially Falsified Testimony” — Inherent Power, R. 37, R. 30(d): “Sanctions … Must Be Proportionate” (Good Quotes)

Donelson v. Hardy, 2019 WL 2949473 (7th Cir. July 9, 2019) (unpublished): ORDER *1 Charles Donelson sued a nurse and Wexford Health Sources, Inc., for allegedly providing him with constitutionally deficient medical care in prison and retaliating against him for filing other lawsuits. After the ...
Donelson v. Hardy, 2019 WL 2949473 (7th Cir. July 9, 2019) (unpublished): ORDER *1 Charles Donelson sued a nurse and Wexford Health Sources, Inc., for allegedly providing him with constitutionally deficient medical care in prison and retaliating against him for…
Continue Reading

Class Action Fairness Act If Federal Jurisdiction Is Based Only on CAFA, Which Provides Jurisdiction Only for “Class Action[s],” Does Denial of Class Certification Divest Court of Jurisdiction? — No

 Coba v. Ford Motor Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20183 (3d Cir. July 8, 2019): Problematic as a lemon of a vehicle may be, the problem becomes more complex when it is peeling. This appeal involves a put ...
Coba v. Ford Motor Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20183 (3d Cir. July 8, 2019): Problematic as a lemon of a vehicle may be, the problem becomes more complex when it is peeling. This appeal involves a putative consumer class …
Continue Reading

Text Authentication OK Via Non-Participant Witness Who Observed Exchange of Texts and Knows Contents, Coupled with Alleged Recipient’s Acting in Accordance with Contents

 State v. Bitner, 2019 Wash. App. LEXIS 1661 (Wash. Ct. App. June 25, 2019): James Bitner appeals his conviction for delivery of a controlled substance — methamphetamine. The State charged Bitner a ...
State v. Bitner, 2019 Wash. App. LEXIS 1661 (Wash. Ct. App. June 25, 2019): James Bitner appeals his conviction for delivery of a controlled substance — methamphetamine. The State charged Bitner after law enforcement directed a confidential informant (CI) to …
Continue Reading

Failure to File Written Objection to Magistrate Judge R&R Waives Review of Dist. Ct’s Judgment Is Not Jurisdictional & May Be Disregarded — Especially When Dist. Ct. Has Disregarded It, Too — Sanctions: Vexatious Litigant Injunction

Bonds v. Daley, 2019 WL 2647494 (6th Cir. May 17, 2019): ORDER *1 Todd Bonds, a pro se litigant, appeals the district court’s judgment denying his motion for summary judgment, granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and granting the defendants’ motion to declare him a vexatiou ...
Bonds v. Daley, 2019 WL 2647494 (6th Cir. May 17, 2019): ORDER *1 Todd Bonds, a pro se litigant, appeals the district court’s judgment denying his motion for summary judgment, granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and granting the …
Continue Reading

Social Media Photo Properly Authenticated by Person Who Has Seen Subject of Photo in Same Garb in Person and in Footage That Subject Has Admitted Depicts Him

 Commonwealth v. Kelley, 2019 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2531 (Pa. Super. Ct. June 28, 2019): Robert Leon Kelley, Jr. ("Kelley"), appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed following his conviction ...
Commonwealth v. Kelley, 2019 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2531 (Pa. Super. Ct. June 28, 2019): Robert Leon Kelley, Jr. ("Kelley"), appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed following his convictions of one count of theft by unlawful taking, and three…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions Apt for Frivolous $160 Million Damages Claims (inter alia) — “Sanctions Are Warranted When a Party Exhibits Deliberate Indifference to Obvious Facts” (Good Quote)

EMI Sun Village, Inc. v. Catledge, 2019 WL 2714325 (11th Cir. June 28, 2019) (unpublished): In this appeal, Fred Elliott and several entities under his control challenge the district court’s order setting aside the entry of default and dismissing one defendant, its order dismissing most of the claims in their complaint for failing ...
EMI Sun Village, Inc. v. Catledge, 2019 WL 2714325 (11th Cir. June 28, 2019) (unpublished): In this appeal, Fred Elliott and several entities under his control challenge the district court’s order setting aside the entry of default and dismissing one…
Continue Reading
Previous50515253545556Next

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