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

Video Spoliation — Negligent Loss / Destruction Insufficient, Willfulness Required (4th Cir. Common Law) — Defendant’s Mistaken Belief Video Preserved Precludes Willfulness, Sanctions — Same Result under Rule 37(e) (Adopted During Case)

Boone v. Everett, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3818, 2019 WL 493681 (4th Cir. Feb. 7, 2019) (unpublished): Wally Boone, a Virginia inmate, appeals the denial of his motion for sanctions on the basis of spoliation against former Virginia correctional officer C.D. Everett. Boone alleged that Everett was responsible for the destruction o ...
Boone v. Everett, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3818, 2019 WL 493681 (4th Cir. Feb. 7, 2019) (unpublished): Wally Boone, a Virginia inmate, appeals the denial of his motion for sanctions on the basis of spoliation against former Virginia correctional officer …
Continue Reading

RICO: Married Couple May = Associated-in-Fact Enterprise — No Heightened Structure Requirement — “Marriage Certificate Doesn’t Transform Mail/Wire Fraud Into Ordinary Household Management” (Good Quotes)

Al-Rayes v. Willingham, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3565 (11th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019): The creditors in this case claim that a husband and wife worked together to commit multiple acts of m ...
Al-Rayes v. Willingham, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3565 (11th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019): The creditors in this case claim that a husband and wife worked together to commit multiple acts of mail and wire fraud over several years for …
Continue Reading

Rule 408 Offer of Settlement: While a Dispute Is Required, “Actual … Difference of Opinion” Enough — Communication Needn’t “Expressly & Outwardly Dispute Amount or Validity of Claim” — Tone & Context May Show Dispute Exists

Savy Surfers v. Wings of Minot ND LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14548 (D. N.D. Jan. 30, 2019): Before the Court is a motion in limine regarding the admissibility of an email filed ...
Savy Surfers v. Wings of Minot ND LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14548 (D. N.D. Jan. 30, 2019): Before the Court is a motion in limine regarding the admissibility of an email filed by the Plaintiff, Savy Surfers, Inc.…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Expert Witness Lacks Standing to Appeal the Striking of His or Her Testimony — Expert Reports: Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) Doesn’t Require Disclosure of Communications Irrelevant to Expert’s Opinion

A.H. Lundberg Assocs. v. Tsi, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3562, 2019 WL 449695 (9th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019): MEMORANDUM*
A.H. Lundberg Assocs. v. Tsi, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3562, 2019 WL 449695 (9th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019): MEMORANDUM* Expert witness Dr. Richard J. Martin ("Martin") and Martin Thermal Engineering, Inc. appeal the district court's imposition of …
Continue Reading

No Inherent Power (IHP) to Bar Retrial after 2 Hung Juries Where No Gov’t Misconduct Prejudicing Def. — Exercise of IHP Must Be Reasonable Response to Problem & Can’t Be Contrary to Rule, Stat—Can’t Use IHP to Create Rule in Conflict with Fed Rules

United States v. Wright, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1541 (3d Cir. Jan. 17, 2019): The District Court barred a retrial of and dismissed the indictment against Defendant Raymont Wright ...
United States v. Wright, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1541 (3d Cir. Jan. 17, 2019): The District Court barred a retrial of and dismissed the indictment against Defendant Raymont Wright with prejudice after two juries failed to reach a verdict. …
Continue Reading

Anonymous Parties vs. Rule 10(a): Does Proceeding Anonymously Without Leave of Court Strip Court of Jurisdiction? — Circuit Split — Factors Sufficient & Insufficient to Warrant Anonymity

Plaintiff Doctor v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. #3, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13900, 2019 WL 351492 (E.D. La. Jan. 29, 2019): Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff Doctor v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. #3, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13900, 2019 WL 351492 (E.D. La. Jan. 29, 2019): Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss1 filed on behalf of defendants, Hospital Service District No.…
Continue Reading

Third-Party Hearsay within Business Record/Admission (Email) Prepared by Agent of Party Must Independently Satisfy Hearsay Rule [Johnson v. Lutz Unmentioned]

Walker v. DDR Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12307, 2019 WL 331223 (D.S.C. Jan. 25 2019): This matter is before the court for review of DDR Corp. and BRE DDR Harbison Court LLC's (col ...
Walker v. DDR Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12307, 2019 WL 331223 (D.S.C. Jan. 25 2019): This matter is before the court for review of DDR Corp. and BRE DDR Harbison Court LLC's (collectively, "Defendants") Motion in Limine to…
Continue Reading

§ 1782 “For Use” Satisfied by (1) Foreign Arbitration (Case Law Split), (2) Criminal Investigation (If Applicant Can Inject the Data) & (3) Liquidation Proceeding That Does More Than Enforce Prior Judgments

In re In re the Children's Inv. Fund Found. UK, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14862 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 30, 2019): On March 21, 2018, Applicants The Children's Investment Fund Foundation (UK ...
In re In re the Children's Inv. Fund Found. UK, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14862 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 30, 2019): On March 21, 2018, Applicants The Children's Investment Fund Foundation (UK) ("Children's Fund"), Sir Christopher Hohn, and Axon Partners, LP…
Continue Reading

Sanctions Denial for Failure to Provide Safe Harbor— Good Quotes: “This Fight Has Gone on Long Enough” — “Enough Is Enough” — “The Facts Sound More Like a Soap Opera Than a Federal Court Case”

Rocket Real Estate, LLC. v. Maestres, 2019 WL 384408 (11th Cir. Jan. 30, 2019) (unpublished): *1 This fight has gone on long enough. In the current battle of this longstanding legal feud, Appellant Lourdes Maestres appeals from the district court’s denial of her motion for sanctions against Appellee ...
Rocket Real Estate, LLC. v. Maestres, 2019 WL 384408 (11th Cir. Jan. 30, 2019) (unpublished): *1 This fight has gone on long enough. In the current battle of this longstanding legal feud, Appellant Lourdes Maestres appeals from the district…
Continue Reading

Voicemail Authenticity Unaffected by Fact Exhibit Is Re-Recording — Best Evidence Satisfied by Unavailability of Original under Rule 1004 [& 1002] & Authenticity by Phone Owner’s Identification of Voice & Party’s Admission

People v. Lemoine, 2018 Mich. App. LEXIS 1778 (Mich. Ct. App., Apr. 24, 2018): Per Curiam. Defendant appeals as of right his jury conviction of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-II),
People v. Lemoine, 2018 Mich. App. LEXIS 1778 (Mich. Ct. App., Apr. 24, 2018): Per Curiam. Defendant appeals as of right his jury conviction of second-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-II), MCL 750.520c(1)(a), for which the trial court sentenced…
Continue Reading
Previous65666768697071Next

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