28 USC § 1782—looking for consensus

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-345
Author(s):  
David J Stute
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Since the 1948 enactment of 28 USC § 1782 in the United States, no consensus has emerged as to the availability of federal court discovery to parties in private foreign or international arbitral proceedings. This year, within months of one another, six federal courts have issued rulings that are widely inconsistent on the availability of section 1782 discovery. The courts have ruled that a proceeding before a private international arbitral tribunal is eligible for section 1782 discovery; that, categorically, no such discovery is available; that the definition of private arbitral tribunal applies to CIETAC; and that discovery is available by virtue of a party’s parallel pursuit of discovery through foreign civil proceedings. As these cases demonstrate, recent US court decisions have brought no predictability, let alone certainty, to the subject. Congress, on the other hand, could and should amend the statute so as to include private tribunals in the scope of section 1782. This article discusses the case law’s state of disarray; proposes a legislative solution; considers the proposed amendment’s merits; and advocates for Congress to act.

Explorer without a country: the question of Vilhjalmur Stefansson's citizenship

Polar Record ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-241
Author(s):  
Janice Cavell ◽  
Jeff Noakes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Canadian Arctic ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dual Citizenship ◽  
American Citizen ◽  
American Citizenship ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Government

ABSTRACTConfusion has long existed on the subject of Vilhjalmur Stefansson's citizenship. A Canadian (that is, a British subject) by birth, Stefansson was brought up and educated in the United States. When his father became an American citizen in 1887, according to the laws of the time Stefansson too became an American. Dual citizenship was not then permitted by either the British or the American laws. Therefore, Stefansson was no longer a British subject. After he took command of the government sponsored Canadian Arctic Expedition in 1913, Stefansson was careful to give the impression that his status had never changed. Although Stefansson swore an oath of allegiance to King George V in May 1913, he did not take the other steps that would have been required to restore him to being Canadian. But, by an American act passed in 1907, this oath meant the loss of Stefansson's American citizenship. In the 1930s American officials informed Stefansson that he must apply for naturalisation in order to regain it. From 1913 until he received his American citizenship papers in 1937, Stefansson was a man without a country.

scholarly journals Notes Procedural Fencing in Retiree Benefits Disputes: Applications of the First-Filed Rule in Federal Courts

2007 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Vanneman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
West Virginia ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Phone Call ◽  
District Court ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
Southern District ◽  
Maximum Benefit

Basil Chapman retired from ACF Industries, a railroad-car maker, after thirty-eight years of service. In December 2003, he received an unexpected phone call at his West Virginia home from a union representative, who informed him that an ACF executive wanted to speak with him. When they spoke, the executive informed Mr. Chapman that ACF was planning on changing its retirees’ health coverage plan. The ACF plan would now have a lifetime maximum benefit cap on hospital and surgical expenses for each participant and would require retirees to make monthly contributions. According to court papers filed later, Mr. Chapman responded, “We have a contract. You can’t do that.” Then, he said that he would “file in federal court” against ACF. The next business day, ACF filed a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri asking the court to rule that retiree benefits were not vested and that ACF accordingly could alter benefits unilaterally. On January 26, 2004, Mr. Chapman, other named plaintiffs, and their union sued ACF in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

Pendent Jurisdiction in Australia—Section 32 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976

1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. M. C. Gummow
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Statutory Law ◽  
The Future

The Federal Court of Australia has only the jurisdiction conferred on it by statute. However, many disputes falling within that jurisdiction, particularly in trade practices matters, will also involve elements of common law or other State or federal statutory law. Section 32 invests in the Federal Court additional jurisdiction in some such cases in respect of “associated matters”. This may be compared with “pendent jurisdiction” developed by the federal courts in the United States. The object of this article is to analyse the meaning of the term “associated matters” and to consider the bearing it has upon the future relationship between the Federal Court and the various State courts.

scholarly journals The Need for Specific Penalties for Hacking in Criminal Law

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sangkyo Oh ◽  
Kyungho Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Literature ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Severe Punishment ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Computer Fraud

In spite of the fact that hacking is a widely used term, it is still not legally established. Moreover, the definition of the concept of hacking has been deployed in a wide variety of ways in national literature. This ambiguity has led to various side effects. Recently in the United States, reforms collectively known as Aaron's Law were proposed as intended amendments to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Most experts expect that this change will put the brakes on the CFAA as a severe punishment policy, and result in a drop in controversial court decisions. In this study, we analyze the definitions and the penalties for hacking for each country and compare them with the national law and then make suggestions through more specific legislation. We expect it will reduce legal controversy and prevent excessive punishment.

scholarly journals Subject Matter and Pre-Requisites for Protection of Non-Conventional Trademark

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-80
Author(s):  
Aishwarya Vatsa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The World ◽  
Definition Of

We have been gifted with senses other than our eyes, which the non-conventional trademarks aim to employ and have thus gained popularity. These marks have gradually acquired acceptance and have been included under the ambit of trademarks in various countries of the world. Trademark law aims at facilitating profit and strengthening the identity of a business. Non-conventional marks too, perform the same function. The United States has taken a similar approach and has thus provided protection to various such non-conventional marks. India, on the other hand, is yet to take a similar approach. The present law in India disallows the registration of such marks, proving to be a hindrance in their registration, rather than a facilitator. This paper discusses the concept and definition of non-conventional marks, its subject matter and the prerequisites for its registration. By comparing the different approaches to non-conventional trademarks and the procedure for their registration across different countries, this paper aims at suggesting a model suitable for adoption in India.

Letters to the Editor

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1968 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 854-855
Author(s):  
Myron E. Wegman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Infant Mortality ◽  
International Comparison ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Quantitative Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Letters To The Editor ◽  
Live Births ◽  
Definition Of

Dr. Thomas is, of course, quite correct in noting that various reporting countries use different definitions of live births, a problem which does complicate the matter of precise comparisons. On the other hand, the report from which Dr. Thomas quotes, International Comparison of Perinatal and Infant Mortality, goes on to analyze several instances in which quantitative data on definitions are available. The major problem, of course, has to do with definition of a live birth; for example, the Swedish definition of a live birth was not the same as that in the United States until 1959.

The United States: Creation, Reconstruction, the Progressives, and the Modern Era

2021 ◽  
pp. 97-182
Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
State Legislatures ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
American People ◽  
State Governments ◽  
State Laws

This chapter focuses on the origins and growth of judicial review of the constitutionality of federal and state legislation in the United States. American judicial review emerged from the vertical federalism umpiring of the King-in-Council, which reined in errant colonies; and from the open political space created by bicameralism, the separation of powers, and federalism, which gave the federal courts the political leeway to engage in judicial review of the constitutionality of federal and state laws. American judicial review took its present form of allowing horizontal separation of powers and enumerated powers vertical judicial review during the critical years between 1776 and 1803 when the faith of the American people shifted away from state legislatures and state governments and toward stronger executives and courts and a much stronger national government. This theory is set forth correctly by Professor Gordon S. Wood in both articles he has shared with me and in conversation. The addition of the three Reconstruction Amendments, and the enormous statutory expansions of federal court jurisdiction and of the number of lower federal court judges after the Civil War, occurred for rights from wrongs reasons. They led, after the incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states between 1940 and 1970, to a situation where the Supreme Court now reins in errant state legislatures in much the same way the King-in-Council used to rein in errant colonial legislatures.

The Many Faces of Federal Court Deference

Deference ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 13-72
Author(s):  
Gary Lawson ◽  
Guy I. Seidman
Keyword(s):  
Federal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Jury Verdicts ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Legal Contexts ◽  
The Many ◽  
Definition Of

US federal courts identify many of their doctrines and activities as acts of deference. This book uses those identifications as the raw material for its inductively derived definition of and framework for deference. Doctrines and practices identified as deference arise in connection with appellate review of findings of fact of legislative, executive, and judicial bodies (including juries); review of legal findings of those bodies; review of policymaking, or discretionary, judgments of those bodies; and review of (or refusals to review) actions of state courts. The scope of deference ranges from total (abstention or absence of review) or near-total (rational basis review of legislative action or jury verdicts) to minimal (so-called Skidmore deference, under which agency legal interpretations receive whatever weight they merit all things considered). Many of the same considerations noted by federal courts appear in legal contexts outside the United States, such as the margin of appreciation doctrine employed by some international tribunals and Wednesbury review in the United Kingdom. This chapter seeks to identify enough instances of deference to allow generalizations about the nature, scope, and reasons for deference that are developed in subsequent chapters.

Why Teach About Congress

1984 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 12-14
Author(s):  
Roger Davidson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mark Twain ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
United States Congress ◽  
Love Affair ◽  
Will Rogers ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The U.S

Political scientists' long-standing love affair with the United States Congress no doubt baffles people outside the profession. By the same token, the popularity of courses on Congress is not fully understood. Articles and monographs on the subject pour out at a phenomenal rate, and students receive unique benefits from courses on the subject year after year. Still the question is posed: Why so much attention to the U.S. Congress?Much of the puzzlement arises from Congress's persistent image problem. The other branches of government have nothing quite like the comic image of Senator Snort, the florid and incompetent windbag, or Congressman Bob Forehead, the bland and media-driven founder of the "JFK Look-Alike Caucus." Pundits and humorists — from Mark Twain and Will Rogers to Johnny Carson, from Thomas Nast to Garry Trudeau — find Congress an inexhaustible source of raw material. Running down Congress, it seems, is a leading national pastime.

scholarly journals A Cannon for Cooperation: A Review of the Interagency Cooperation Literature

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell M Frazier
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Manufacturing Sector ◽  
The United States ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Cooperative Relationships ◽  
Interagency Cooperation ◽  
Random Forces ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

This literature review encompasses a myriad of sources that offer a wide-ranging view of the subject of interagency cooperation. The review is thematic in nature and draws primarily on resources (i.e., books, academic databases, and EBooks & EJournals) available from multiple libraries. Interagency cooperation is an imperative part of the United States research and development (R & D) diffusion agenda, principally in the manufacturing sector. Nevertheless, the principles of realizing efficacious cooperative relationships are important. Thus, the review focuses on literature that can offer direction for policy stakeholders planning to establish, or re-evaluating governance oriented delivery structures. The components of this review include: a definition of interagency cooperation and essential elements of interagency cooperation-external (systematic and random) forces, shared problems, resources, and capacity building.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document