Foreign Data Protection Laws: Greater Impact on U.S. Discovery than Foreign Blocking Statutes
Litigants are increasingly relying on foreign data protection laws – especially new laws in China and the European Union – to resist discovery requests from courts in the United States. Historically, U.S. courts do not limit discovery just because the production of the requested materials or information would violate foreign laws. So far, as Bill…
Continue ReadingThe Billion-Dollar Choice-of-Law Question
Choice-of-law rules can be complex, confusing, and difficult to apply. Nevertheless, they are vitally important. The application of choice-of-law rules can turn a winning case into a losing case (and vice versa). A recent decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. v. MUFG Union Bank, N.A., is…
Continue ReadingDoes the TVPRA Apply Extraterritorially? Thoughts on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Amicus Brief in Doe v. Apple
As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly limited the scope of the implied cause of action under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), victims of human rights abuses have looked to other U.S. statutes for remedies. One of these is the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), which creates a civil remedy against perpetrators and others…
Continue ReadingSinger on Personal Jurisdiction Law and Choice-of-Law Doctrine
Professor Joseph Singer has a terrific new article that is well worth reading. In Hobbes & Hanging: Personal Jurisdiction v. Choice of Law, published in the Arizona Law Review, he writes about the contradictions between personal jurisdiction law and choice-of-law doctrine in the United States. He argues that personal jurisdiction law is one-sided and unbalanced…
Continue ReadingThe Case for Attracting Litigation Business to the United States
U.S. state and federal courts routinely and reliably enforce “inbound” forum selection clauses (FSCs)—that is, if a party sues in a U.S. court designated by a contractual forum selection clause, courts will hear the case rather than dismissing on the basis of forum non conveniens. In a recent post, John Coyle urged federal actors to…
Continue ReadingContracting for U.S. Courts in Transnational Commercial Litigation
Among the most important provisions that litigators search for once alerted of a potential dispute are forum selection clauses embedded in a large number of modern commercial contracts. Over the past several decades, state legislators and the U.S. Supreme Court have increasingly enabled parties to litigate in U.S. courts, even for lawsuits with significant “foreign”…
Continue ReadingShould the Federal Government Seek to Attract Litigation to the United States?
U.S. courts have become significantly more hostile towards transnational litigation over the past two decades. Scholars such as Pam Bookman and Maggie Gardner have argued that a series of Supreme Court decisions—relating to the law of personal jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, international comity abstention, the presumption against extraterritoriality, and service of process, among others—have made…
Continue ReadingDistrict Court Dismisses Another Case Against MBS for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
Two weeks ago, while King Salman was appointing Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman (MBS) as Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia in an apparent bid to secure him head-of-state immunity in a suit brought by Jamal Khashoggi’s widow, the judge in a different case quietly dismissed another plaintiff’s claims against MBS for lack of personal jurisdiction….
Continue ReadingEnforcing Chinese Judgments: A Response
In July, Bill Dodge discussed the enforcement of Chinese judgments in U.S. courts, using the Shanghai Yongrun case as a recent example and arguing against systemic review of foreign legal systems. Along the way, he cited Judging China, a recent paper of mine. He accurately characterized me as less than enthusiastic about U.S. courts enforcing…
Continue Reading