Rejecting Comity-Based Abstention in Human Rights Cases
Defendants in transnational human rights cases may seek dismissal on a great many bases—so many, in fact, that it can be hard to keep them all straight. One growing source of confusion is the argument that a case should be dismissed based on “comity.” The problem is that comity isn’t a single doctrine. But because…
Continue ReadingAdmiralty’s Influence on Transnational Procedure
Admiralty was the original site of transnational litigation in U.S. courts. Given the breadth of admiralty jurisdiction, the federal courts developed a number of procedural tools for balancing international comity and practical concerns in these international business disputes. Just because a foreign ship showed up in a U.S. port, for instance, didn’t mean a U.S….
Continue ReadingHome Isn’t Just Where the Nerve Center Is
An opinion last month issued by a Texas appellate court illustrates a tempting but potentially dangerous doctrinal shortcut: applying a test developed for subject matter jurisdiction to the analysis of general personal jurisdiction. The diversity statute (28 U.S.C. § 1332) defines a corporation’s citizenship as its place of incorporation and its “principal place of business”…
Continue ReadingSeeking Second Circuit Review of Service in Smart Study
The plaintiff in Smart Study has attempted to appeal Judge Woods’ careful decision concluding that the Hague Service Convention does not permit service by email.
Continue ReadingHappy Holidays
TLB is taking a break for the holidays. We will return to blogging on Tuesday, January 3.
Continue ReadingTLB’s Top Ten Posts in 2022
As 2022 draws to a close, so too does the first year for TLB. We began blogging in late March. Since then, we have published nearly two hundred posts by more than fifty authors. Here are TLB’s top ten posts, by number of views, in 2022. (1) Maggie Gardner, U.S. Courts Gut Key Provision of…
Continue ReadingThrowback Thursday: Blackmun’s Prescient Dissent in Aérospatiale
In Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. U.S. District Court (1987), the Supreme Court held that U.S. courts need not treat the procedures set forth in the Hague Evidence Convention as the exclusive or even the primary means for managing discovery of evidence located abroad. Four justices dissented in part in a remarkably prescient opinion authored…
Continue ReadingCert Petition Raises Personal Jurisdiction Question in Context of the TVPRA
The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) explicitly authorizes extraterritorial application to six predicate offenses (18 U.S.C. § 1596) and creates a private right of action (18 U.S.C. § 1595). Assuming without deciding that § 1595’s civil remedy extends extraterritorially to the same extent as those six predicate offenses, the Ninth Circuit in Ratha v….
Continue ReadingA Primer on International Comity
The Supreme Court in Hilton v. Guyot (1895) famously defined international comity as “the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation.” That definition is incomplete, however, as comity encompasses much more than the recognition of foreign acts. The Restatement (Fourth) of Foreign Relations Law…
Continue Reading“Catching and Killing” Suits Against Boeing
A recent decision by the Northern District of Illinois (Judge Franklin Valderrama) exemplifies the phenomenon that TLB advisor Zach Clopton has termed catch and kill jurisdiction: when federal courts stretch to take cases from state courts only to dismiss them on procedural grounds that the state courts would not have applied. In Wragge v. Boeing,…
Continue Reading