Rethinking Jurisdictional Discovery under the Hague Evidence Convention

By Gilchrist, Kathleen Braun | Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, January 2011 | Go to article overview

Rethinking Jurisdictional Discovery under the Hague Evidence Convention


Gilchrist, Kathleen Braun, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law


ABSTRACT

When a federal court in the United States compels the discovery of information located abroad to determine whether it has jurisdiction over the defendant, the court can apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Hague Evidence Convention. This Note argues that the approach taken by most courts--applying the balancing test formulated by the Supreme Court in Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. District Court and favoring application of the Federal Rules--is misguided. Courts should apply the Evidence Convention more often in jurisdictional discovery disputes. They can do so under the existing legal framework with one of three holdings: (1) the Aerospatiale test does not apply to jurisdictional discovery disputes and parties must use the Evidence Convention; (2) the Aerospatiale test does not apply and the Evidence Convention should be used as a first resort, turning to the Federal Rules only when the Convention's procedures prove infeasible; or (3) the Aerospatiale test applies, but recognition that the court has not established personal jurisdiction weighs so heavily in favor of applying the Evidence Convention that it has a similar effect as the first-resort approach. Each of these alternatives is preferable to the current approach.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 I. INTRODUCTION

II. BACKGROUND
     A. Discovery and Jurisdiction in the
        United States
     B. Evidence Gathering Outside of the
        United States
     C. Hague Convention on the Taking of
        Evidence Abroad in Civil or
        Commercial Matters
     D. The Aerospatiale Decision
     E. Lower Courts' Application of Aerospatiale
     F. Comity
     G. Jurisdictional Discovery Under the
        Hague Evidence Convention

III. PROPOSALS
     A. The Evidence Convention as the Exclusive
        Means for a Party to Obtain
        Jurisdictional Discovery Abroad
     B. The Evidence Convention as a First Resort
     C. Applying the Evidence Convention as a
        Result of the Aerospatiale Balancing Test

 IV. CONCLUSION

I. INTRODUCTION

Justice Blackmun, in the U.S. Supreme Court decision Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. District Court (Aerospatiale), explained that, "no aspect of the extension of the American legal system beyond the territorial frontier of the United States has given rise to so much friction as the request for documents associated with investigation and litigation in the United States." (1) The Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (Evidence Convention), ratified by the United States in 1972, reflects an effort on behalf of the signatory countries to find common ground in light of significant differences in evidence-gathering procedures. (2) In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Aerospatiale, held that the Evidence Convention is an optional procedure that can be used in lieu of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Federal Rules). (3) The Court granted lower courts the discretion to employ the procedures of the Evidence Convention in a case after examining "the particular facts, sovereign interests, and likelihood that resort to those procedures will prove effective." (4) Subsequent lower court cases generally have placed the burden of persuasion on the party requesting application of the Evidence Convention. (5) Furthermore, these courts usually conclude that the party failed to meet that burden and apply the Federal Rules. (6)

In Aerospatiale, the defendant did not contest personal jurisdiction, and as a result, the Court did not address whether its holding applies to jurisdictional discovery. A number of district courts and one appellate court have addressed this issue, and most have held that (1) the Aerospatiale balancing test applies equally to jurisdictional discovery, and (2) the balancing test favors application of the Federal Rules. (7) The arguments in support of these positions are misguided. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Rethinking Jurisdictional Discovery under the Hague Evidence Convention
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.