Tag: blocking statute

  • Case of the Day: In re SNP Boat Service SA

    The case of the day is In re SNP Boat Service SA (Bankr. S.D. Fla.). The court’s opinion is very short, which is unfortunate, because the case seems quite interesting and the court does not lay out all the facts. But the outlines seem clear enough. The case involves foreign intransigence about US discovery and […]

  • New Article on Blocking Statutes etc.

    William R. Maguire of Hughes Hubbard & Reed has a new article, Current Issues in Federal Civil E-Discovery, Proportionality, International Discovery and Deposition Practice, and Changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Obviously such a broad article cannot comprehensively cover all of the areas within its scope. But the article does provide a good […]

  • Digest: January 16, 2011

    Gannon Int’l, Ltd. v. Blocker, Civ. A. No. 10-835 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 13, 2011). The court approved service of a summons and complaint by personal delivery to a U.S. citizen defendant in Vietnam (not a party to the Hague Service Convention) under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(2)(C)(i), on the grounds that Vietnam law does not […]
{"cc_re__cc_re__cc_by_sa_4_0": ["d=\"https://linkedin.com/in/tfolkman\">LinkedIn</a><br><a href=\"https://federate.social/@tedfolkman\">Mastodon</a><br><a href=\"https://twitter.com/tedfolkman\">Twitter</a></p>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow\">\n<p><strong>Policies</strong></p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https://lettersblogatory.com/privacy\">Privacy</a><br><a href=\"https://lettersblogatory.com/disclaimer\">Disclaimer</a><br><a href=\"https://lettersblogatory.com/public-key.txt\">Public Key</a></p>\n\n\n\n<p></p>\n</div>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<p><a rel=\"license\" href=\"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"Creative Commons License\" style=\"border-width:0\" src=\"https://static.lettersblogatory.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/88x31.png\"></a><br /><span xmlns:dct=\"http://purl.org/dc/terms/\" href=\"http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text\" property=\"dct:title\" rel=\"dct:type\">Letters Blogatory</span> by <a xmlns:cc=\"http://creativecommons.org/ns#\" href=\"https://lettersblogatory.com\" property=\"cc:attributionName\" rel=\"cc:attributionURL\">Ted Folkman and contributors </a> is \u00a9 2011-2023 an", "alt=\"Creative Commons License\" style=\"border-width:0\" src=\"https://static.lettersblogatory.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/88x31.png\"></a><br /><span xmlns:dct=\"http://purl.org/dc/terms/\" href=\"http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text\" property=\"dct:title\" rel=\"dct:type\">Letters Blogatory</span> by <a xmlns:cc=\"http://creativecommons.org/ns#\" href=\"https://lettersblogatory.com\" property=\"cc:attributionName\" rel=\"cc:attributionURL\">Ted Folkman and contributors </a> is \u00a9 2011-2023 and is licensed under a <a rel=\"license\" href=\"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License</a>. Images may be separately licensed. Letters Blogatory is a registered trademark in the United States.</p>\n</div>\n</footer></div>\n\n\t\t<style id=\"skip-link-styles\">\n\t\t.skip-link.screen-reader-text {\n\t\t\tborder: 0;\n\t\t\tclip: rect(1px,1px,1px,1px);\n\t\t\tclip-path: inset(50%);\n\t\t\theight: 1px;\n\t\t\tmargin: -1px;\n\t\t\toverflow: hidden;\n\t\t\tpadding: 0;\n\t\t\tposition: absolute !important;\n\t\t\twidth: 1px;\n\t\t\tword-wrap: normal !important;\n\t\t}\n\n\t\t.ski"], "copyright__copyright__copyright": ["l Procedure. Obviously such a broad article cannot comprehensively cover all of the areas within its scope. But the article does provide a good [\u2026]\n\n  \u2022 Digest: January 16, 2011\n\n    Gannon Int\u2019l, Ltd. v. Blocker, Civ. A. No. 10-835 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 13, 2011). The court approved service of a summons and complaint by personal delivery to a U.S. citizen defendant in Vietnam (not a party to the Hague Service Convention) under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(2)(C)(i), on the grounds that Vietnam law does not [\u2026]", "l Procedure. Obviously such a broad article cannot comprehensively cover all of the areas within its scope. But the article does provide a good [\u2026]\n\n  \u2022 Digest: January 16, 2011\n\n    Gannon Int\u2019l, Ltd. v. Blocker, Civ. A. No. 10-835 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 13, 2011). The court approved service of a summons and complaint by personal delivery to a U.S. citizen defendant in Vietnam (not a party to the Hague Service Convention) under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(2)(C)(i), on the grounds that Vietnam law does not [\u2026]"]}