By: Jeffrey M. Haber On June 5, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court held that claims for disgorgement imposed as a sanction for violation of the federal securities laws must be commenced within five years of the date the claim accrues. 1 In doing so, the Court concluded that disgorgement “in the securities enforcement context is a ‘penalty’ within the meaning of Section 2462” of the U.S. Code.  In concluding that disgorgement is a penalty, the Supreme Court looked at two factors. F

By: Jeffrey M. Haber What is Expungement and When is It Granted? Expungement is the process by which a brokerage firm or registered representative seeks to remove an adverse disclosure event from the Central Registration Depository (CRD®) system. The CRD is the securities industry’s online registration and licensing database. Information in the CRD is obtained through forms that brokerage firms, associated persons and regulators complete as part of the securities industry reg

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In past articles, we have discussed the necessity of pleading the “who”, “what”, “when” and “how” of an alleged fraud. See , e.g. , here . In many respects, the requirement to plead the “who”, “what”, “where”, and “how” of an alleged fraud, primarily relates to the first element of the claim – falsity. 1 In this regard, a plaintiff alleging fraud must allege the time, place, and content of the defendant’s false representations, as well as the details of

By Jonathan H. Freiberger In this Blog’s article entitled: “ Revive a Time-Barred Claim Using § 17-101 of New York’s General Obligations Law ,” we discussed the general purpose of statutes of limitations, noting that: “The Statute of Limitations was enacted to afford protection to defendants against defending stale claims after a reasonable period of time had elapsed during which a person of ordinary diligence would bring an action. The statutes embody an important policy of

By: Jeffrey M. Haber Earlier this month, we wrote about how courts enforce contracts that are clear and unambiguous. The title of the article, “ Contracts That Say What They Mean, Mean What They Say ”, aptly describes this fundamental principle of contract interpretation. After all, a contract that is clear and unambiguous on its face reflects the intent of the parties. 1 And, the courts will enforce the parties’ intent when it is plainly written in the agreement.  Courts wi

By: Jeffrey M. Haber Arbitration is an alternative form of dispute resolution where the parties voluntarily agree that a neutral, private person will resolve any legal disputes between them, instead of a judge or jury in a court of law. 1 It is encouraged and recognized as the public policy of the State of New York. 2 Consequently, courts will interfere as little as possible with the agreement of consenting parties to submit their disputes to arbitration. 3 Generally, a cou

By Jonathan H. Freiberger This Blog frequently writes about decisions related to residential mortgage foreclosure actions.  < Here =">Here</a>" and="and" the="the" articles="articles" hyperlinked="hyperlinked" therein.="therein.">   One frequent topic that is always ripe for treatment is the repeated failure of lenders to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of RPAPL 1304 due to shortcomings in the evidence presented on their prima facie case.  Suffice it to say, on N

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In today’s article, we consider a case in which, as the title indicates, timing is everything. Before we discuss the case, let’s consider the following scenario.  The parties to a litigation reach a settlement in principle. They do so while a motion to dismiss the action (or a motion for summary judgment) is pending. Before the parties can execute the definitive agreement that memorializes their settlement, the court decides the motion and dismisses the a

By: Jeffrey M. Haber The doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel embody related but distinct concepts. They both stand for the general proposition that a party to a litigation should have only one bite at the apple and should not be permitted to relitigate the same issue over and over again. Under the doctrine of res judicata, a final judgment on the merits of a claim precludes re-litigation of that claim by a party, and those in privity with that party. 1 This mea