Skip to main content

Home/ Groups/ 28 USC § 1782
Rss Feed
Sort By: Most Recent | Popular Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Lars Bauer

EXTRADITION AND FOREIGN EVIDENCE: 28 USC 1782: Swiss party can use to obtain evidence - 0 views

obtainingforeignevidence.blogspot.com/...82-swiss-party-can-use-to.html

28-USC-1782 discovery decisions Weber_Finker

shared by Lars Bauer on 17 Jan 09 - Cached
Lars Bauer liked it
  • The Appellants are shareholders in Itera Group, Ltd., a Cypriot corporation, who all reside in Jacksonville, Florida (“Florida shareholders”).
  • The Florida shareholders appeal the Magistrate Judge’s April 15, 2008 Order granting in part and denying in part Galina Weber’s Motion to Compel Discovery, and thedistrict court’s May 20, 2008 affirmance of that Order.
  • Weber is a citizen of Switzerland and a resident of Monaco. Like the Florida shareholders, she is a shareholder of Itera Group.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Weber is involved with two separate foreign legal actions. Both involve business transactions with Itera Group. Weber is the plaintiff in a Cypriot civil action. She is also the defendant in a Swiss criminal action, which Itera instituted against her, alleging that she received property embezzled from the company.
  • Weber filed a civil lawsuit in Cyprus against Itera Group, the CEO of Itera Group, Igor V. Makarov, and Sweet Water Intervest Corporation, which is a British Virgin Islands corporation that Weber alleges is controlled by Makarov.
  • After Weber instituted the Cypriot action, Gas Itera, an Itera Group subsidiary, filed criminal charges against Weber in Switzerland, alleging that Weber embezzled Itera Group assets.
  • The Supreme Court held in Intel that discovery under § 1782 is not limited to discovery that would be allowed under United States law “in domestic litigation analogous to the foreign proceeding.” See Intel, 542 U.S. at 263, 124 S. Ct. at 2483.
  • Lars Bauer on 17 Jan 09
     
    The Eleventh Circuit in Weber v Finker ruled that a Swiss national can use 28 USC 1782, and is not limited to the Swiss-US mutual legal assistance treaty, for purposes of obtaining evidence in Swiss proceedings, which include a Swiss criminal proceeding.
Lars Bauer

Galina Weber v. Lazar Finker, et al. - 0 views

www.morelaw.com/...case.asp

28-USC-1782 Weber_Finker

shared by Lars Bauer on 04 Feb 09 - Cached
Lars Bauer liked it
  • Lars Bauer on 04 Feb 09
     
    Entscheid bei MoreLaw
Lars Bauer

Kluwer Arbitration Blog » U.S. Discovery in Aid of International Arbitration:... - 0 views

kluwerarbitrationblog.com/...rbitration-recent-developments

28-USC-1782 arbitration

shared by Lars Bauer on 04 Feb 09 - Cached
Lars Bauer liked it
  • Lars Bauer on 04 Feb 09
     
    by Lucy Reed for Freshfields, Feb 3, 2009
Lars Bauer

May Courts Assist Private International Arbitration? The judicial split over ... - 0 views

www.law.com/...PubArticleIHC.jsp

28-USC-1782 arbitration articles

shared by Lars Bauer on 19 Mar 09 - Cached
Lars Bauer liked it
  • Lars Bauer on 19 Mar 09
     
    Sofia E. Biller and Howard S. Suskin, March 19, 2009
Lars Bauer

Denial of Section 1782 Discovery Based on District Court's Discretion Highlights Differ... - 1 views

blog.internationalpractice.org/?p=1361

28-USC-1782 case-notes law discovery

shared by Lars Bauer on 17 Apr 11 - No Cached
  • Caratube involved a § 1782 petition by the oil company directed at persons and entities in the U.S., which Caratube claimed had information helpful to its prosecution of an international arbitration before ICSID (the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes).  The ICSID tribunal declined to ask Caratube to cease and desist the § 1782 discovery requests.  It did say that it didn’t want the U.S. discovery petition to interfere with the arbitration, and the tribunal reserved on the question whether to admit documents obtained through the § 1782 petition.
  • In the § 1782 proceeding, the District Court exercised its discretion to deny the § 1782 request.
  • the District Court relied on several of the considerations articulated in Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004).
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • It found that uncertainty about whether ICSID would accept the documents weighed against granting the discovery and further believed that the nature of the ICSID proceeding – arising by reason of a bilateral investment treaty between the U.S. and Kazakhstan – somehow put the court in a position of possibly interfering with the “parties’ bargained-for expectations concerning the arbitration process”.  The District Court did not analyze whether the ability to get U.S. discovery under § 1782 formed a part of the parties’ expectations in the first place. 
  • The Court was moved by the fact that Caratube had outlined the discovery it thought was necessary in the arbitration and apparently did not include a § 1782 request.
  • Indeed, the Rules of the International Bar Association, which the District Court found persuasive authority as a guideline giving indications regarding the relevant criteria for what documents may be requested and ordered to be produced, says specifically that a party should “take whatever steps are legally available to obtain the requested documents”.  Although the IBA rules suggest that that request go to the arbitral panel, in the U.S. there is a statute that permits the party going directly to the third-party with the documents using the vehicle of a § 1782 petition.
  • In the end the District Court was concerned that Caratube was attempting to “circumvent foreign proof-gathering restrictions or other policies of a foreign country or the United States”. 
  • Lars Bauer on 17 Apr 11
     
    In re Application of Caratube, 10-0285 (D.D.C. 2010) [730 F.Supp. 2d 101]
Lars Bauer

Jenner & Block LLP - December 2008 Update: Arbitration - 0 views

www.jenner.com/...news_item.asp

arbitration discovery 28-USC-1782

shared by Lars Bauer on 12 Mar 09 - Cached
  • Pre-Hearing Discovery From Non-Party To An Arbitration Disallowed.The Second Circuit has held that Section 7 of the Federal Arbitration Act does not authorize an arbitrator to compel pre-hearing document discovery from non-parties to an arbitration.  Life Receivables Trust v. Syndicate 102, 549 F.3d 210 (2d Cir. 2008).  Reversing the district court’s grant of a motion to enforce a discovery subpoena, the court of appeals concluded that documents are discoverable in arbitration proceedings only when brought before the arbitrators by a testifying witness.  The court declined to find exceptions for either closely-related entities or for parties to the arbitration agreement that are not parties to the arbitration itself.  In reaching this result, the Second Circuit followed the Third Circuit, but split with the Eighth Circuit.
  • Discovery On Behalf Of Foreign Tribunals Does Not Encompass Arbitrations.The Southern District of Texas has held that 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which authorizes a district court to order persons residing in the district to give discovery “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal,” does not encompass private, international arbitration proceedings.  La Comision Ejecutiva Hidroelecctrica Del Rio Lempa v. El Paso Corp., No. H-08-335, 2008 WL 5070119 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 20, 2008).  The court declined to follow the other district courts that have held to the contrary.  In holding section 1782 inapplicable, the court noted that arbitration is intended as a speedy and economical means of dispute resolution, and that extensive discovery through federal courts would harm international comity.
Lars Bauer

Karadelis: Chevron gets access to film footage under section 1782 | Global Arbitration ... - 0 views

www.globalarbitrationreview.com/...28407

28-USC-1782 discovery arbitration USA Ecuador ICSID Chevron-Case

shared by Lars Bauer on 16 May 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 16 May 10
     
    "Affirming for the first time that section 1782 applications extend to treaty arbitrations, a New York court has allowed Chevron to access 600 hours of unreleased footage from a 2009 documentary film, to be used as evidence in an arbitration with Ecuador and other legal proceedings."
Lars Bauer

Westlaw case watch - 0 views

watch.westlaw.com/dbmonservice.aspx

28-USC-1782 cases

shared by Lars Bauer on 08 Mar 09 - Cached
  • In re Application of Peter Damien MARANO for Order to Take Discovery Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782. , N.D.Cal., February 25, 2009ORDER D. LOWELL JENSEN, District Judge. On February 12, 2009, Peter Damien Marano ("Marano") filed an application to take discovery pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782. On February 20, 2009, Frances F. Bowes ("Bowes") filed a letter brief in opposition. Having considered the papers submitted and the applicable law, the Court hereby DENIES the application. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual Background and Procedural History Marano is a party in a divorce proceeding in London, England. According to Marano, th...
Lars Bauer

Section 1782: Big News For International Reinsurance Arbitrations (Mary A. Lopatto, Mar... - 0 views

www.mealeysonline.com/...articleSearch.do

28-USC-1782 arbitration reinsurance articles

shared by Lars Bauer on 23 Mar 09 - Cached
  • Section 1782: Big News For International Reinsurance Arbitrations, Mealey's Litigation Report: Reinsurance, March 20, 2009, 19-22 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 14 (2009), Volume 19, Issue #22
  • Lars Bauer on 23 Mar 09
     
    Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance, Vol. 19, Issue 22 (March 20, 2009), p. 14
Lars Bauer

Alford: Chevron's Discovery of Crude Outtakes | Roger Alford, Opinio Juris, May 7, 2010 - 0 views

opiniojuris.org/...ns-discovery-of-crude-outtakes

28-USC-1782 discovery arbitration ICSID Chevron-Case case-notes

shared by Lars Bauer on 12 May 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 12 May 10
     
    "Yesterday a federal court in New York granted Chevron's request for discovery of outtakes from the 2009 documentary Crude about the multi-billion dollar litigation in Ecuador. Chevron's request was pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782, which authorizes a judge in the United States to order discovery of evidence to be used in proceedings before a foreign tribunal." -- Also published on Kluwer Arbitration Blog: http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/blog/2010/05/07/chevrons-discovery-of-crude-outtakes/
Lars Bauer

Pedro J. Martinez-Fraga / Transnational Dispute Management @ www.transnational-dispute-... - 0 views

www.transnational-dispute-management.com/...author_detail.asp

28-USC-1782 articles

shared by Lars Bauer on 08 Mar 09 - Cached
  • Application and Avoidance of §28 U.S.C. §1782 Discovery in International Commercial Arbitration; Can the New York Convention and the Doctrine of "Manifest Disregard of the Law" Help or Hurt? TDM Volume 6, issue #01 - March 2009
Lars Bauer

Goldstein: More Fuel on the Fire Concerning Section 1782 in Arbitration | Marc J. Golds... - 0 views

arbblog.lexmarc.us/...ng-section-1782-in-arbitration

28-USC-1782 discovery arbitration ICSID USA Ecuador Chevron-Case

shared by Lars Bauer on 12 May 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 12 May 10
     
    Note on In re Application of Chevron Corp., Misc. No. 19-111 (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2010) with link to the not-officially-published decision
Lars Bauer

US-Klage der IKB Deutsche Industriebank AG | GERICHTSREPORTER.US, May 8, 2010 - 0 views

www.gerichtsreporter.us/...-ikb-deutsche-industriebank-ag

28-USC-1782 discovery usa

shared by Lars Bauer on 10 May 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 10 May 10
     
    Antrag der KB Deutsche Industriebank AG vor dem D. Mass. auf Durchführung des Beweisverfahrens nach § 1782 gegen die Putnam Advisory Company, LLC, zwecks Verwendung in einem Verfahren vor dem High Court of Justice in London (Verteidigung gegen Klage der Calyon Credit Agricole CIB). Dem Antrag wurde am 26.1.2010 stattgegeben.
Lars Bauer

Iyandra's Take: Anti-Suit Injunctions: Why they're so Hard to Get! | Apr 29, 2010 - 0 views

iyandrabryan.blogspot.com/...injunctions-why-theyre-so.html

Cayman-Islands USA cases decisions cross-border-litigation anti-suit-injunction 28-usc-1782

shared by Lars Bauer on 02 May 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 02 May 10
     
    Note on Phoenix Meridian Equity Limited v Lyxor Asset management S.A., CICA No, 4 of 2009 (Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands) - "The issue raised by the appeal is whether the Chief Justice erred in principle in refusing an application on behalf of Lyxor for an order restraining Phoenix from continuing proceedings in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under [ 28 U.S.C. § 1782 ] in the course of which it seeks to depose two individuals (...) who have given witness statements in, and are potential witnesses at the trial of the Cayman proceedings."
Lars Bauer

US courts interpret the scope of 28 U.S.C. s1782 | Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garr... - 0 views

arbitration.practicallaw.com/7-422-4955

28-USC-1782 cases arbitration

shared by Lars Bauer on 21 Oct 09 - No Cached
  • The court found that the source of the ICC panel's authority (private agreement between the parties) and its purpose, as an alternative to governmental or state-sponsored proceedings, militate against classifying it as a foreign or international tribunal.
  • on 1 August 2009, in In Re Application of Operadora DB Mexico, 6:09 CV 383 (M.D. Fl. 2009)
  • On 3 August 2009, in Comision Ejecutiva Hidroelectrica del Rio Lempa v. Nejapa Power Company, No. 08-3518 (3rd Cir. 2009)
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • On 6 August 2009, in El Paso Corporation v. La Comision Ejecutiva, No. 08-20771 (5th Cir. 2009)
  • held that a private arbitral tribunal constituted under the International Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration (ICC) does not qualify as a foreign or international tribunal under § 1782
  • Lars Bauer on 21 Oct 09
     
    "In a number of recent rulings, US courts have interpreted the scope of 28 U.S.C. s. 1782 (...). These rulings, which all resulted in dismissing s.1782 applications, may suggest a growing trend towards narrowly interpreting the statute."
Lars Bauer

The Renewed Debate on the Limits of Discovery Under Section 1782 | Epaminontas Triantaf... - 0 views

kluwerarbitrationblog.com/...f-discovery-under-section-1782

28-USC-1782 arbitration discovery USA case-notes Norfolk_ACE

shared by Lars Bauer on 10 Nov 09 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 10 Nov 09
     
    Note on In re Arbitration in London, England between Norfolk Southern Corp. et al. and Ace Bermuda Ltd., No. 1:09-cv-03092 (N.D. Ill. Jun 15, 2009) (An appeal from that decision is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit)
Lars Bauer

Fulbright & Jaworski - Second Issue of 2009 International Arbitration Report (Dec 1, 2009) - 0 views

www.fulbright.com/index.cfm

arbitration 28-USC-1782 EuGVVO

shared by Lars Bauer on 08 Dec 09 - Cached
  • Major topics include: Update on the Dubai International Financial Centre Foreign Arbitral Awards and Chinese Courts Arbitration and EU Regulation 44/2001 Section 1782 Update
Lars Bauer

Skillful Ways of Gathering and Using Discovery Abroad | International Asset Recovery La... - 0 views

www.internationalassetrecoverylaw.com/...nd-using-discovery-abroad.html

civil-procedure discovery netherlands 28-USC-1782 usa

shared by Lars Bauer on 15 Dec 09 - Cached
  • For instance, in the Netherlands, Dutch courts have held that evidence obtained under Section 1782 may be used in proceedings there.  Under Dutch civil procedure, a party may request production of documents. Courts have decided that only documents relevant to the outcome of the proceedings will be produced and to grant such request, the  applicant's claim must be well-reasoned and at least not be obviously without merit. If it is not certain that the documents exist, Dutch courts will not order their production. There is also a conflict among court decisions as to whether only documents where the applicant is a party to the legal relationship can be produced. Hence, Dutch discovery can be very limiting.
  • Dutch courts have ruled that evidence obtained pursuant to Section 1782 is admissible in the Dutch proceeding since it was not unlawfully obtained.
Lars Bauer

Biller & Suskin: May Courts Assist Private International Arbitration? The jud... - 0 views

www.law.com/...PubArticleCC.jsp

28-USC-1782 arbitration discovery law

shared by Lars Bauer on 23 Jan 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 23 Jan 10
     
    by Sofia E. Biller and Howard S. Suskin
Lars Bauer

Moore: A Sea Change in 28 U.S.C. § 1782 Cases? U.S. Fifth Circuit and Two Dis... - 0 views

www.klgates.com/...Detail.aspx

28-USC-1782 arbitration USA case-notes

shared by Lars Bauer on 23 Jan 10 - Cached
  • Lars Bauer on 23 Jan 10
     
    by Abram I. Moore (Chicago) - Note on El Paso Corp. v. La Comision Ejecutiva Hidroelectrica Del Rio Lempa (5th Cir. Aug 6, 2009) and the two district court decisions in In re: Application of Operadora DB Mexico, S.A. de C. V. (Fla.) and In re An Arbitration in London, England (Ill.)
1 - 20 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page