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

(1) RICO: Causation Requires Direct Relation Between Injury and Conduct — May Properly Be Assessed at Pleading Stage — “Civil RICO Is An Unusually Potent Weapon And For That Reason Courts Strive To Flush Out Frivolous Rico Allegations At An Early Stage Of The Litigation” (Good Quote) — (2) Denial of Leave to Amend Usually Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion But De Novo Review Applies If Denial Based on a Legal Interpretation, Such as Futility

*1 Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Plaintiffs Jonathan and Esther Zuhovitzky challenge the district court’s dismissal, pursuant to
*1 Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Plaintiffs Jonathan and Esther Zuhovitzky challenge the district court’s dismissal, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure …
Continue Reading

RICO: Basic Elements of Civil RICO Claim and Pattern Requirement

Gladney v. Consumers Credit Union, 2024 WL 2797914 (11th Cir. May 31, 2024) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Abram Gladney, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se civil complaint against Consumers Credit Union (“CCU”), with whom Gladney refinanced his car loan, for failure to state a claim. Gladney also appeals the ...
Gladney v. Consumers Credit Union, 2024 WL 2797914 (11th Cir. May 31, 2024) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Abram Gladney, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se civil complaint against Consumers Credit Union (“CCU”), with whom Gladney refinanced…
Continue Reading

Rule 37 Sanction of Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors — Factors Applied More Stringently When Fault Lies with Counsel Rather Than Party — Bad Faith/Willfulness/Fault Satisfied by Delay or Contumacious Conduct — Failure to Comply with Discovery Requests or Court Order Versus Merely Dilatory Conduct — Time, Money and Effort to Obtain Legally-Required Cooperation = Prejudice — Dismissal May Be First and Only Sanction

D & R Servs., LLC v. Mesa Underwriters Specialty Ins. Co., 2024 WL 2830660 (6th Cir. June 4, 2024): *1 D & R Services, LLC and DD & KD Services, LLC1 brought this action against their insurer, Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company (“MUSIC”), after MUSIC allegedly failed to pay for wi ...
D & R Servs., LLC v. Mesa Underwriters Specialty Ins. Co., 2024 WL 2830660 (6th Cir. June 4, 2024): *1 D & R Services, LLC and DD & KD Services, LLC1 brought this action against their insurer, Mesa Underwriters…
Continue Reading

RICO Conspiracy: (1) Fourth Circuit’s 3-Part Test Requires Conspiring to Operate or Manage the Enterprise (Minority Rule Following Salinas) — (2) Conspirator Need Not Personally Commit Any Predicate Acts — Sufficient That S/he Agreed That One Member of the Conspiracy Commit At Least 2 Predicate Acts — Unnecessary to Identify Specific Racketeering Acts That The Defendant Agreed Would Be Committed — “The Object Of A Rico Conspiracy Is To Engage In Racketeering, Not To Commit Each Predicate Racketeering Act” — Necessary to Prove Only The Defendant Agreed to Pursue The Same Criminal Objective As the Enterprise — (4) Because A Racketeering Conspiracy Is Not Contingent On Specific Predicates, A Jury May Convict On A RICO Conspiracy Charge While Acquitting Defendant On Predicate Acts

United States v. Hunt, 99 F.4th 161 (4th Cir. 2024): This appeal arises from the prosecution of the “36th Street Bang Squad” (the “Bang Squad”), a gang that committed a string of murders, attempted murders, and assaults in 2015 and 2017. The United States charged seven of the gang’s members — Martin Hunt, Deshaun Richardson, Eric Nixon, Xavier Greene, Raymond Palmer, ...
United States v. Hunt, 99 F.4th 161 (4th Cir. 2024): This appeal arises from the prosecution of the “36th Street Bang Squad” (the “Bang Squad”), a gang that committed a string of murders, attempted murders, and assaults in 2015 and…
Continue Reading

Circuit Split — Derivative Actions — Third Circuit Joins Majority of Circuits in Holding That Dismissal Decisions on Grounds of Futility Are Subject to De Novo Review, Abandoning Abuse of Discretion — Relevant Factors in Deciding Whether De Novo or Deferential Review Is Appropriate

In re: Cognizant Tech. Solutions Corp. Derivative Litigation, 101 F.4th 250 (3d Cir. 2024) (en banc): We initiated en banc review of this case to consider what standard of appellate review ought to apply when a district court dismisses a shareholder derivative action for failure to plead demand futility under
In re: Cognizant Tech. Solutions Corp. Derivative Litigation, 101 F.4th 250 (3d Cir. 2024) (en banc): We initiated en banc review of this case to consider what standard of appellate review ought to apply when a district court dismisses a …
Continue Reading

RICO: No Domestic Injury Where Investors In Ghana Placed Funds With Ghanaian Investment Firm And Those Funds Were Stolen In Ghana By A Ghanaian Family Domiciled In The US — Irrelevant That Funds Were Transmitted To US entity Owned By Ghanaian-American Defendants — Domestic Injury May Properly Be Decided On Motion To Dismiss — Rejecting A Conduct-Plus-Property Rule: That A RICO Injury Arises In The Place Where A Plaintiff’s Property Is Located At The Time Of The Racketeering Conduct

Opinion This case began when investors in Ghana placed their funds with a Ghanaian private investment firm, hoping to recoup a profit. Instead, a Ghanaian family domiciled in Virginia allegedly used a web of shell companies across Ghana and the United States to illicitly transfer those funds out of the investors’ reach.  
Opinion This case began when investors in Ghana placed their funds with a Ghanaian private investment firm, hoping to recoup a profit. Instead, a Ghanaian family domiciled in Virginia allegedly used a web of shell companies across Ghana and the …
Continue Reading

RICO: 9(b) Particularity Applies to Mail and Wire Fraud Allegations; Even Where Some Allegations Are Insufficiently Particular, A Complaint May Satisfy 9(B) If Its Allegations Are Sufficiently Particularized When Taken As A Whole; Four Elements of a § 1962(c)-Based RICO Claim — Appealability: Dismissal without Prejudice Is Appealable If No Leave to Amend Granted, Judgment Entered and Case Closed — Dismissal for Failure to Satisfy 9(b) Treated As 12(b)(6) Dismissal for Failure to State Claim for Relief — Court First Determines Whether 9(b) Satisfied And, If So, Whether 12(b)(6) Is — “Rule 12(b)(6) Motions To Dismiss Are Not Designed To Weigh Evidence Or Consider The Truth Or Falsity Of An Adequately Pled Complaint” (Good Quote)

Clinton v. Sec. Ben. Life Ins. Co., 63 F.4th 1264 (10th Cir. 2023):  [*1269]  ROSSMAN, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs are consumers who sued Defendant Security Benefit Life Insurance Company under the ...
Clinton v. Sec. Ben. Life Ins. Co., 63 F.4th 1264 (10th Cir. 2023):  [*1269]  ROSSMAN, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs are consumers who sued Defendant Security Benefit Life Insurance Company under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 …
Continue Reading

RICO Standing: As Long As Pattern of Racketeering Has Caused Harm to Plaintiff’s Business or Property, Plaintiff Need Not Have Been Injured by Multiple Predicate Acts — Injury from One of the Predicate Acts Suffices to Confer Standing

Pacmar Techs. LLC v. Kao, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231131 (D. Haw. Dec. 29, 2023): ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART: DEFENDANT DUKE HARTMAN'S MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, FILED APRIL 21, 2023 [ECF 97]; DEFENDANT/C ...
Pacmar Techs. LLC v. Kao, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231131 (D. Haw. Dec. 29, 2023): ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART: DEFENDANT DUKE HARTMAN’S MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, FILED APRIL 21, 2023 [ECF 97]; DEFENDANT/CROSS-CLAIMANT CLIFFORD …
Continue Reading

Sanctions for “Exceptional” Patent Cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285 — Liability for Attorneys’ Fees Limited to Parties — Silence of Statute on Liability of Counsel, Unlike § 1927 and Rule 11, Precludes Award

Dragon Intell. Prop. LLC v. Dish Network L.L.C., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12057 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2024): ...
Dragon Intell. Prop. LLC v. Dish Network L.L.C., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12057 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2024): Sanctions for “Exceptional” Patent Cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285 — Liability for Attorneys’ Fees Limited to Parties — Silence of Statute …
Continue Reading

Supreme Court — Federal Arbitration Act — Inherent Power May Be Controlled or Overridden by Statute or Rule — When the District Court Compels Arbitration, It Must Stay and Cannot Dismiss The Federal Action — “Shall Means Shall”

Smith v. Spizzirri, 2024 U.S. LEXIS 2170, 2024 WL 2193872 (U.S. May 16, 2024): The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) sets forth procedures for enforcing arbitration agreements in federal court. Section 3 of the FAA specifies that, when a dispute is s ...
Smith v. Spizzirri, 2024 U.S. LEXIS 2170, 2024 WL 2193872 (U.S. May 16, 2024): The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) sets forth procedures for enforcing arbitration agreements in federal court. Section 3 of the FAA specifies that, when a dispute…
Continue Reading
Previous45678910Next

Recent Posts

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

RICO and Injunctions: (1) State Court Actions Designed to Perpetuate and Monetize a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable under RICO, Even Though They Are Not Themselves Alleged to Be Predicate Acts [Note: Noerr Pennington Applies in RICO Actions] — (2) Although Civil RICO’s Text and Legislative History Fail to Reveal Any Intent to Override the Provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act, Arbitrations Are Enjoinable Under the “Effective Vindication” Doctrine Where They Operate As a Prospective Waiver of a Party’s Right to Pursue Statutory RICO Remedies — (3) Arbitration Findings May Be Given Collateral Estoppel Effect in a Civil RICO Action — (4) Injunction of Non-Corrupt State Court Litigations That Furthers a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable Under the Anti-Injunction Act’s “Expressly Authorized” Exception — (5) “The Irreparable Harm Requirement Is The Single Most Important Prerequisite For The Issuance Of A Preliminary Injunction” (Good Quote) — (6) When Injunction Is Based on “Serious Questions on the Merits” Rather Than “Likelihood of Success,” Court May Rely on Unverified Pleadings and Attached Exhibits to Assess the Merits, Unless the Opponent Has Raised Substantial Questions (Here, the Opponent Failed to Request an Evidentiary Hearing) — (7) Whether Amended Pleading Moots An Appeal Turns on Whether It Materially Changes the Substantive Basis for the Appeal — (8) Meaning of “In That” (“Used To Introduce A Statement That Explains Or Gives More Specific Information” About A Prior Statement)

RICO: Fraudulent Concealment Must Prevent Discovery of the Injury to Toll Statute of Limitations

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

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