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

Jury Trial Waiver: Which Party Bears Burden of Proving Knowingness & Voluntariness of Waiver? — Circuit Split

Servicios Comerciales Lamosa, S.A. v. De La Rosa, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148905 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2018): Before [*2]  the court are Plaintiff Revestimientos Porcelan ...
Servicios Comerciales Lamosa, S.A. v. De La Rosa, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148905 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2018): Before [*2]  the court are Plaintiff Revestimientos Porcelanite, S.A. de C.V.'s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 90), filed April 17, 2018;…
Continue Reading

Sanctions for State Court Misconduct in Removed Case: Rule 11 Irrelevant, Whether / If Federal Court Should Apply State Sanctions Rules Is Matter of Dispute — Order to Show Cause Issued As to Why Inherent Power Sanctions Should Not Issue

Wronko v. Martin, 2018 WL 4562462 (D.N.J. Sept. 24, 2018): INTRODUCTION *1 This matter comes before the Court upon three Motions for Rule 11 Sanctions. (ECF Nos. 70, 72, 73.) These Motions are brought by Defendants Michael Baltazar, Borough of Helmetta, Devon Gannon, Helmetta Police Dep ...
Wronko v. Martin, 2018 WL 4562462 (D.N.J. Sept. 24, 2018): INTRODUCTION *1 This matter comes before the Court upon three Motions for Rule 11 Sanctions. (ECF Nos. 70, 72, 73.) These Motions are brought by Defendants Michael Baltazar, Borough of…
Continue Reading

Fourfold Purposes of Rule 37 Sanctions / Single Purpose of § 1927 Sanctions — Depositions: Objection “You Can Answer If You Know” or “Understand” Is Always Improper — Conduct Not OK in Courtroom Not OK at Deposition (Good Quotes)

Hunter v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 2018 WL 4352823 (E.D. La. Sept. 12, 2018): ORDER AND REASONS *1 Before the Court are two related motions, the “Motion for an Order for Sanctions, Attorney Fees, Perjury, and to Reschedule the Depositions and Conduct Them in Chambers” and the “Motion f ...
Hunter v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 2018 WL 4352823 (E.D. La. Sept. 12, 2018): ORDER AND REASONS *1 Before the Court are two related motions, the “Motion for an Order for Sanctions, Attorney Fees, Perjury, and to Reschedule the Depositions…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence: Government Website Contents Are Self-Authenticating

Bingham v. Barnhart, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106170 (E.D. Ky. June 26, 2018): Petitioner Randall Dale Bingham has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 ...
Bingham v. Barnhart, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106170 (E.D. Ky. June 26, 2018): Petitioner Randall Dale Bingham has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. [R. 1.] At the…
Continue Reading

Rule 37 Sanctions: Dismissal Is a “Last Resort” But Is Appropriate If Noncompliance Is Due to Willful or Bad Faith Disregard for Discovery Orders (Good Quote)

Taylor v. Bradshaw, 2018 WL 3414344 (11th Cir. July 13, 2018): PER CURIAM: Charlotte Taylor, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s entry of judgment in favor of defendants following a jury trial on her claims under
Taylor v. Bradshaw, 2018 WL 3414344 (11th Cir. July 13, 2018): PER CURIAM: Charlotte Taylor, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s entry of judgment in favor of defendants following a jury trial on her claims under 42 U.S.C. …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence: Information on Government Websites Is Self-Authenticating under Rule 902(5) and Admissible under Rule 803(8) (Public Records Exception)

Rychorcewicz v. Welltec, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123512 (S.D. Tex. June 22, 2018) (Report and Recommendation): Pending before the court1
Rychorcewicz v. Welltec, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123512 (S.D. Tex. June 22, 2018) (Report and Recommendation): Pending before the court1 is Defendant Welltec, Inc.'s ("Defendant") Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 89) and Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike (Doc.…
Continue Reading

Appeals: Untimely Rule 59(e) Motion = 60(b) Motion & Appeal Is from Denial of That — Removal: While Remand Orders Are Usually Unappealable, They Are for Removal under § 1443, Allowing Removal Where Constitutional Rights Can’t Be Enforced in State Ct

Sanders v. Wright, 2018 WL 3933773 (5th Cir. 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* *1 Rockey D. Wright, proceeding pro se, challenges the district court’s denying his motion for relief following its remanding his child-custody action to state court ...
Sanders v. Wright, 2018 WL 3933773 (5th Cir. 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* *1 Rockey D. Wright, proceeding pro se, challenges the district court’s denying his motion for relief following its remanding his child-custody action to state court after Wright…
Continue Reading

RICO: Res Judicata Effect of State Court Judgment Determined by State Law — Where State Would Not Permit Collateral Attack of Judgment on Grounds of Suppression of Evidence, RICO Claim Alleging That Fails

Kearney v. Foley & Lardner, LLP, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 24024 (9th Cir. Aug. 24, 2018): MEMORANDUM* Joan Kearney ("Kea ...
Kearney v. Foley & Lardner, LLP, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 24024 (9th Cir. Aug. 24, 2018): MEMORANDUM* Joan Kearney ("Kearney") appeals from the district court's summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. HN1[]…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Bankruptcy Court Has Inherent Power to Suspend, Disbar Lawyers from Practicing Before It — Recidivist Bad Faith Conduct Gleaned by Judicial Notice — Rule 11 Precedent Rightly Relied on Construing 9011

Koebel v. Chandler (In re Cuevas), 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 23838 (9th Cir. Aug. 23, 2018): MEMORANDUM* In this consolidated ...
Koebel v. Chandler (In re Cuevas), 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 23838 (9th Cir. Aug. 23, 2018): MEMORANDUM* In this consolidated appeal, Philip E. Koebel (Koebel) appeals the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) decision affirming a bankruptcy court's orders suspending …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice May Be Taken of Distances Established by Internet Mapping Services — Here, Google Maps

Haynes v. Acquino, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107005, 2018 WL 3126725 (W.D.N.Y. June 26, 2018): In this civil rights action, commenced April 29, 2010, Plaintiff alleges false arrest, excessive forc ...
Haynes v. Acquino, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107005, 2018 WL 3126725 (W.D.N.Y. June 26, 2018): In this civil rights action, commenced April 29, 2010, Plaintiff alleges false arrest, excessive force and malicious prosecution against Defendants, police officers with the…
Continue Reading
Previous79808182838485Next

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