113 Cited authorities

Johnson v. U.S.
559 U.S. 133 (2010) Cited 2,748 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) ’s nearly identical "physical force" clause "means violent force—that is, force capable of causing physical pain or injury to another person"
Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v. Darue Eng'g & Mfg.
545 U.S. 308 (2005) Cited 3,217 times 47 Legal Analyses
Holding "that the national interest in providing a federal forum for federal tax litigation is sufficiently substantial to support the exercise of federal-question jurisdiction."
Cooter Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.
496 U.S. 384 (1990) Cited 4,131 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that it is necessarily an abuse of discretion to apply the wrong legal standard
Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.
561 U.S. 247 (2010) Cited 1,458 times 177 Legal Analyses
Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction
Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co.
473 U.S. 479 (1985) Cited 4,226 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that the fact that a statute can be "applied in situations not expressly anticipated by Congress does not demonstrate ambiguity. It demonstrates breadth."
Boyle v. United States
556 U.S. 938 (2009) Cited 1,134 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that a RICO enterprise "need not have a hierarchical structure or a 'chain of command'; decisions may be made on an ad hoc basis and by any number of methods — by majority vote, consensus, a show of strength, etc."
Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indem. Co.
553 U.S. 639 (2008) Cited 1,104 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that bidders at a county tax-lien auction plausibly alleged RICO proximate causation when they lost to a competing bidder who lied to the county about complying with the auction's rules
Salinas v. United States
522 U.S. 52 (1997) Cited 1,207 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that the canon of construction requiring a clear statement to alter the federal-state balance of criminal jurisdiction "does not warrant a departure from terms" where the statute's "text . . . is unambiguous on the point under consideration"
ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd.
493 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2007) Cited 3,874 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that deception occurs when "investors are misled to believe that prices at which they purchase and sell securities are determined by the natural interplay of supply and demand, not rigged by manipulators"
Cheek v. United States
498 U.S. 192 (1991) Cited 1,075 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that a defendant in a criminal tax case can assert a defense of ignorance or misunderstanding of the tax law, leading to "a good-faith belief that he was not violating any of the provisions of the tax laws"
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 90,531 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Section 2 - Principals
18 U.S.C. § 2 Cited 23,773 times 57 Legal Analyses
Holding aiders and abettors punishable as principals under federal criminal law
Section 1962 - Prohibited activities
18 U.S.C. § 1962 Cited 15,876 times 60 Legal Analyses
Specifying prohibited activities
Section 1961 - Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 1961 Cited 14,951 times 72 Legal Analyses
Defining what the terms “person” and “enterprise” include
Section 110.00 - Attempt to commit a crime
N.Y. Penal Law § 110.00 Cited 3,510 times 3 Legal Analyses
Providing that: " person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime when, with intent to commit a crime, he engages in conduct which tends to effect the commission of such crime"
Section 1952 - Interstate and foreign travel or transportation in aid of racketeering enterprises
18 U.S.C. § 1952 Cited 3,261 times 42 Legal Analyses
Making it illegal to travel in interstate commerce to further a gambling business that is illegal under applicable state law
Section 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers
18 U.S.C. § 1030 Cited 3,229 times 408 Legal Analyses
Holding cellular phones are protected
Rule 23.1 - Derivative Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.1 Cited 1,951 times 27 Legal Analyses
Requiring only that the plaintiff allege demand futility "with particularity"
Section 1955 - Prohibition of illegal gambling businesses
18 U.S.C. § 1955 Cited 1,103 times 9 Legal Analyses
Conducting an illegal gambling business
Section 80a-1 - Findings and declaration of policy
15 U.S.C. § 80a-1 Cited 465 times 16 Legal Analyses
Declaring as a policy rationale for the Investment Company Act the prevention of conflicts of interest between investment companies and advisers

Gamoran v. Neuberger Berman LLC et al

113 Cited authorities

Holding that 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) ’s nearly identical "physical force" clause "means violent force—that is, force capable of causing physical pain or injury to another person"

Holding "that the national interest in providing a federal forum for federal tax litigation is sufficiently substantial to support the exercise of federal-question jurisdiction."

Holding that it is necessarily an abuse of discretion to apply the wrong legal standard

Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction

Holding that the fact that a statute can be "applied in situations not expressly anticipated by Congress does not demonstrate ambiguity. It demonstrates breadth."

Holding that a RICO enterprise "need not have a hierarchical structure or a 'chain of command'; decisions may be made on an ad hoc basis and by any number of methods — by majority vote, consensus, a show of strength, etc."

Holding that bidders at a county tax-lien auction plausibly alleged RICO proximate causation when they lost to a competing bidder who lied to the county about complying with the auction's rules

Holding that the canon of construction requiring a clear statement to alter the federal-state balance of criminal jurisdiction "does not warrant a departure from terms" where the statute's "text . . . is unambiguous on the point under consideration"

Holding that deception occurs when "investors are misled to believe that prices at which they purchase and sell securities are determined by the natural interplay of supply and demand, not rigged by manipulators"

Holding that a defendant in a criminal tax case can assert a defense of ignorance or misunderstanding of the tax law, leading to "a good-faith belief that he was not violating any of the provisions of the tax laws"

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Holding aiders and abettors punishable as principals under federal criminal law

Specifying prohibited activities

Defining what the terms “person” and “enterprise” include

Providing that: " person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime when, with intent to commit a crime, he engages in conduct which tends to effect the commission of such crime"

Making it illegal to travel in interstate commerce to further a gambling business that is illegal under applicable state law

Holding cellular phones are protected

Requiring only that the plaintiff allege demand futility "with particularity"

Conducting an illegal gambling business

Declaring as a policy rationale for the Investment Company Act the prevention of conflicts of interest between investment companies and advisers