<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="0.92"><channel><title>Gregory P. Joseph</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/</link><description>Observations about current developments bearing on complex litigation, U.S. and international arbitration, the Federal Rules, and occasionally state rules.</description><language>en-us</language><copyright>Copyright &amp;#169; 2007 Gregory P. Joseph Law Offices LLC. All rights reserved.</copyright><pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:53:16 +0000</pubDate><lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:53:16 +0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Sanctions Developments 2012</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?78</link><description>Sanctions Developments 2012&#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
    In the realm of sanctions, state of mind matters.  Some sanctions require bad faith, and even if negligence is enough, "subjective intent can bear on whether to impose a sanction and what amount to fix.... Even a dog, said Holmes, distinguishe...</description><pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Supreme Court on Civil Practice 2011</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?77</link><description>This article, Supreme Court on Civil Practice 2011, can be accessed by clicking on the title. It is reprinted with permission  Copyright 2011 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc....</description><pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>Federal Arbitration Developments</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?76</link><description>Federal Arbitration Developments &#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
     One of the problems many perceive with arbitration is that the panel, unlike a judge, is not subject to meaningful appellate review and may not feel constrained to exert the same level of analytic rigor.  Parties sometimes attempt to a...</description><pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>Internet and Email Evidence 2011</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?75</link><description>INTERNET AND EMAIL EVIDENCE 2011&#13;
&#13;
 &#13;
&#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
&#13;
                 The explosive growth of the Internet, electronic mail, text messaging and social networks is raising a series of novel evidentiary issues.  The applicable legal principles are familiar &#8212; this evidence must be auth...</description><pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>Developments in the Federal Law of Sanctions</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?74</link><description>This article, which was published in U.S. Law Week, can be accessed here....</description><pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>The Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2011</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?73</link><description>The Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2011&#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
      Legislation has been introduced in Congress to reinstate, in a more aggressive form, the 1983 version of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, under which sanctions were mandatory, not discretionary.  The House held hearings on H...</description><pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>Privilege and Work Product Developments 2010</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?70</link><description>Privilege and Work Product Developments 2010&#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
A recent decision by the D.C. Circuit highlights two cert-worthy issues concerning the scope of work product protection.  This article discusses this and other interesting recent opinions dealing with attorney-client privilege and the...</description><pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>2010 Expert Witness Rule Amendments</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?69</link><description>Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
Effective December 1, 2010, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) and (b)(4) are substantially amended.  These amendments govern disclosure of expert opinion.  &#13;
Three Principal Changes.  The principal practice changes are:&#13;
	Communications between counsel and retained expert...</description><pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>Recent Federal Practice Developments 2010</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?68</link><description>Recent Federal Practice Developments 2010&#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
This article analyzes recent developments in federal practice, including two Supreme Court decisions rendered in the past 60 days.&#13;
Relation Back of Pleading Amendment.  Rule 15(c) determines when an amended pleading relates back to the ...</description><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate></item><item><title>Current Arbitration Issues in Federal Practice</title><link>http://www.josephnyc.com/articles/viewarticle.php?67</link><description>Current Arbitration Issues in Federal Practice&#13;
Gregory P. Joseph*&#13;
The Supreme Court rendered six major arbitration decisions in 2008 and 2009.  This article analyzes each, and it explores other significant arbitration issues percolating in the Circuits.&#13;
Court May Entertain Only Attack on Agreemen...</description><pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>

