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

Sanctions: Shotgun Complaint (All Counts Aimed at All Defendants, Each Incorporating All Factual Allegations) Is Facially Dismissible in 11th Circuit, Constitutes Obstruction when Filed to Delay (Here, Foreclosure) — FRAP 38 Sanctions for Appeal

Jackson v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 21517 (11th Cir. Aug. 3, 2018): This appeal involves an abuse of process engineered to delay or prevent execution of a forecl ...
Jackson v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 21517 (11th Cir. Aug. 3, 2018): This appeal involves an abuse of process engineered to delay or prevent execution of a foreclosure judgment on a residence and the consequent …
Continue Reading

Arbitration: Court Uses Look-Through (Not Well-Pleaded Complaint) Approach to Decide Federal Question Jurisdiction over Motion to Compel — Circuit Split as to Whether That Approach Applies to Petition to Confirm, Vacate or Modify

HealthSpring Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Tex. Health Mgmt. LLC,  , ,8 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105467, 2018 WL 3105655 (E.D. Tex. June 25, 2018): Pending before the Court is Plaintiff HealthSpring Life ...
HealthSpring Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Tex. Health Mgmt. LLC,  , ,8 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105467, 2018 WL 3105655 (E.D. Tex. June 25, 2018): Pending before the Court is Plaintiff HealthSpring Life & Health Insurance Company, Inc.'s ("HealthSpring")…
Continue Reading

Facebook/Social Media Photos — Unnecessary to Authenticate Account to Authenticate Photos — Postings on Social Media Aren’t Business Records of the Platform — Circumstantial Authentication (Surroundings)

United States v. Farrad, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 19614 (6th Cir. July 17, 2018): Although the phrase "going undercover" may still connote high-stakes masquerading, twenty-first century undercove ...
United States v. Farrad, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 19614 (6th Cir. July 17, 2018): Although the phrase "going undercover" may still connote high-stakes masquerading, twenty-first century undercover investigations can begin and end in cyberspace. This case stems from an …
Continue Reading

Spoliation: Rule 37(e) Inadequate to Deal with Intentional Manipulation, Modification of ESI — Inherent Power Dismissal Apt — Appropriate to Punish Wife & Closely Held Corp., Too, when Husband Is Malefactor, Benefits All, & She Declines to Testify

Malone v. Weiss, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129606 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 2, 2018): MEMORANDUM OPINION This case arises out of the sale of Second Opinion, Inc. ...
Malone v. Weiss, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129606 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 2, 2018): MEMORANDUM OPINION This case arises out of the sale of Second Opinion, Inc. ("Second Opinion"), a service business which connects lawyers representing personal injury plaintiffs to …
Continue Reading

Instructions—Commingling Rule: If Case Sent to Jury on Multiple Legal Theories, 1 of Which Is Invalid, Verdict Infirm — If Multiple Factual Theories, 1 Lacking Sufficient Evidence, Not So — Circumstantial YouTube Authentication, Failure to Rebut

Nester v. Textron, Inc., 888 F.3d 151 (5th Cir. 2018): Gini Nester suffered permanent injuries when an unmanned utility vehicle ran her over. Gini and her husband sued Textron, ...
Nester v. Textron, Inc., 888 F.3d 151 (5th Cir. 2018): Gini Nester suffered permanent injuries when an unmanned utility vehicle ran her over. Gini and her husband sued Textron, the vehicle's manufacturer, alleging that the vehicle was defectively designed. …
Continue Reading

Spoliation: Fifth Circuit Requires “Bad Conduct,” Which Generally = Evidence of Bad Faith — None Present Where Irrelevant Evidence and Deleted Pursuant to Standardized Retention Policy

Bryant v. Wal-Mart La., L.L.C., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18312, 2018 WL 3322871 (5th Cir. July 5, 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* ...
Bryant v. Wal-Mart La., L.L.C., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18312, 2018 WL 3322871 (5th Cir. July 5, 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* The district court granted summary judgment to Wal-Mart Louisiana, L.L.C. ("Wal-Mart") on Melanee Bryant's slip-and-fall claim. We…
Continue Reading

Rule 56(f): “Naked Attack” on Credibility of Affiants — Speculation, Fanciful Allegations Not Enough — Litigation Privilege Applies Regardless of Malice, Bad Faith, If Lawyer’s Stmt Tied to Lit., “Barest Rationality” Suffices (Good Quotes)

Grayson v. Ressler & Ressler, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126479 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2018): Violet Elizabeth Grayson ("Grayson" or "Plaintiff") brings this action a ...
Grayson v. Ressler & Ressler, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126479 (S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2018): Violet Elizabeth Grayson ("Grayson" or "Plaintiff") brings this action against Ressler & Ressler, a law firm, Ellen Werther ("Werther"), and Bruce Ressler ("Ressler") (together, "Defendants").…
Continue Reading

Rule 15 Relation Back of Amended Complaint: Issue Is Awareness of Unnamed Defendant, Not Negligence of Plaintiff — 3 Factors

St. John v. 81 Yale Apts., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126530 (N.D. Okla. July 30, 2018): Now before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Dkt. # 20). Plaintiff requests leave to file ...
St. John v. 81 Yale Apts., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126530 (N.D. Okla. July 30, 2018): Now before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Dkt. # 20). Plaintiff requests leave to file an amended complaint adding Lynco, Inc.…
Continue Reading

§ 1782: Evidence Obtained for Use Abroad Is Freely Usable in Any Other Case, Domestic or Foreign, Unless Limited by the Court — Rule 45: If Person Is Subpoena-able, Location of Documents S/he Controls Is Irrelevant

In re Ferrer, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111172, 2018 WL 3240010 (S.D. Fla. July 3, 2018): ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Delcop, LLC's and Ernesto De ...
In re Ferrer, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111172, 2018 WL 3240010 (S.D. Fla. July 3, 2018): ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Delcop, LLC's and Ernesto De Luca's Motion and Incorporated Memorandum of Law to Vacate Ex…
Continue Reading

Instagram: Photos on Social Media Don’t Require Full Social Media Authentication — Lay Witness Competent to Testify as to How Instagram Works, Her Experience with It (Rule 701, Not 702) — Silent Witness Theory Inapt

Commonwealth v. Martin, 2018 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2217, 2018 WL 3121766 (Penn. Super. Ct. App. Div. June 26, 2018) (unpublished): Appellant, Kenneth Martin, appeals from the judgment of sen ...
Commonwealth v. Martin, 2018 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2217, 2018 WL 3121766 (Penn. Super. Ct. App. Div. June 26, 2018) (unpublished): Appellant, Kenneth Martin, appeals from the judgment of sentence of seven and one-half to twenty years of incarceration…
Continue Reading
Previous84858687888990Next

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