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

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 LEXIS 18312, 2018 WL 3322871 (5th Cir. July 5, 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* ...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 LEXIS 18312, 2018 WL 3322871 (5th Cir. July 5, 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* The district court granted summary judgment to Wal-Mart Louisiana, L.L.C. ("Wal-Mart") on Melanee Bryant's slip-and-fall claim.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

Spoliation: Bad Faith Required for Adverse Inference Instruction Means Destruction for the Purpose of Hiding Adverse Evidence — Failure of Counsel to Communicate Court Preservation Order to Responsible Person, without More, Insufficient

United States v. Rodriguez-Sanchez, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20428 (5th Cir. July 23, 2018): PER CURIAM:* Guillermo Rodrigue ...
United States v. Rodriguez-Sanchez, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20428 (5th Cir. July 23, 2018): PER CURIAM:* Guillermo Rodriguez-Sanchez ("Rodriguez") appeals his jury conviction for knowingly, intentionally, and unlawfully importing cocaine and heroin into the United States from Mexico…
Continue Reading

Spoliation: The Bad Faith Required for Adverse Inference Instruction = Destruction for the Purpose of Hiding Adverse Evidence — Failure of Counsel to Communicate Court Preservation Order to Responsible Person, without More, Insufficient

United States v. Rodriguez-Sanchez, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20428 (5th Cir. July 23, 2018): PER CURIAM:* Guillermo Rodrigue ...
United States v. Rodriguez-Sanchez, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20428 (5th Cir. July 23, 2018): PER CURIAM:* Guillermo Rodriguez-Sanchez ("Rodriguez") appeals his jury conviction for knowingly, intentionally, and unlawfully importing cocaine and heroin into the United States from Mexico…
Continue Reading

RICO — Collection of Unlawful Debt — Factors: (1) Usurious Rate, (2) in Connection with Loan, (3) at Least Twice the Enforceable Rate — Do Added Fees Count in Computing Rate?

Kwon v. Santander Consumer United States, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20473, 2018 WL 3546498 (2d Cir. July 24, 2018) (summary order): *1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ...
Kwon v. Santander Consumer United States, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20473, 2018 WL 3546498 (2d Cir. July 24, 2018) (summary order): *1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court…
Continue Reading

Trials: Cross “Is Greatest Engine Invented for Discovery of Truth” — Ct. App. “Must Pay Deference to Trial Judge’s Feel of Case … [S/he] Sees Jurors Wince, Weep, Snicker…” (Good Quotes) — Must Impeachment Evid. Be Admissible?

Angeles v. Nieves, 2018 WL 3149551 (N.J. Super. App. Div. June 28, 2018) (unpublished): *1 After an auto accident, a jury found defendant Carmen I. Nieves liable and awarded plaintiff Christian Angeles a $3,000,000 judgment. Both parties appeal from a December 31, 2015 order. Defendant appeals the order’s denial of ...
Angeles v. Nieves, 2018 WL 3149551 (N.J. Super. App. Div. June 28, 2018) (unpublished): *1 After an auto accident, a jury found defendant Carmen I. Nieves liable and awarded plaintiff Christian Angeles a $3,000,000 judgment. Both parties appeal from a…
Continue Reading

Personal Jurisdiction: Out-of-State Litigation against State Domiciliary Insufficient to Establish Personal Jurisdiction against Lawyer Involved in the Out-of-State Litigation

John Crane, Inc. v. Shein Law Center, Ltd., 891 F.3d 692 (7th Cir. 2018): John Crane, Inc., as a manufacturer of products containing asbestos, has been sued many times for injuries caused by exposure to asbestos. Now it claims some of those suits were part of a conspiracy to defraud the company. It filed lawsuits in the Northe ...
John Crane, Inc. v. Shein Law Center, Ltd., 891 F.3d 692 (7th Cir. 2018): John Crane, Inc., as a manufacturer of products containing asbestos, has been sued many times for injuries caused by exposure to asbestos. Now it claims some …
Continue Reading
Previous85868788899091Next

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