Amendment to Rules of Civil Procedure for The United States District Courts

1962 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 437 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
District Courts

U.S. Regulation on Notarial and Related Services

1967 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 1231-1232
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Foreign Country ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Private Person

(a) Customary practice. Under Federal law (Rule 28(b), Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts of the United States) and under the laws of some of the States, a commission to take depositions can be issued to a foreign official or to a private person in a foreign country. However, this method Is rarely used; commissions are generally issued to U.S. consular officers. In those countries where American consular officers are not permitted to take testimony (see 192.55(c)) and where depositions must be taken before a foreign authority, letters rogatory are usually issued to a foreign court.

Congress and the Political Expansion of the United States District Courts

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M.P. de Figueiredo ◽  
Gerald S. Gryski ◽  
Emerson H. Tiller ◽  
Gary Zuk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
District Courts

scholarly journals Proving Chinese Law in the Courts of the United States

Amicus Curiae ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-215
Author(s):  
Richard K Wagner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
English Language ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Business Culture ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Chinese Business ◽  
The Us

The volume of disputes heard by United States (US) courts containing a China element continues to be robust even against a backdrop of political rhetoric concerning an economic ‘de-coupling’ of the US and China. These cross-border disputes often involve Chinese parties and special issues, some of which concern Chinese business culture, but many of which involve interpreting questions of Chinese law. How is proving Chinese law accomplished in these cases and how have US courts performed in interpreting Chinese law? This article first discusses the approach to proving Chinese law in US courts. While expert testimony is often submitted and can be valuable to a US court, the applicable US rule offers no standards by which these opinions are to be judged. And, in the China context, without specific guidance, it can be challenging for a judge, unaccustomed with China or the Chinese legal system to determine which version of the law to believe. Moreover, under the applicable rule, the US court can simply ignore competing Chinese law opinions and conduct its own Chinese law legal research, presumably using English language sources. This can lead to interesting interpretations of Chinese law to say the least. The article anchors its discussion in an examination of those recent cases which have interpreted Article 277 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China. This is the legal provision of Chinese law that can be implicated in certain situations involving cross-border discovery, and there are now numerous Article 277 cases among the reported US decisions. The article analyses Article 277 by placing it within the larger context of Chinese civil procedure and argues that the language used in the provision has a special meaning within Chinese evidence law that has been obscured in those US case decisions interpreting it, leading to erroneous results. The article concludes by offering judges and practitioners some suggestions for interpreting Chinese law in future US cases. Keywords: Chinese law; US courts; Article 277; deposition; cross-border discovery; Hague Evidence Convention; Chinese civil procedure.

Political Climate, Voter Suppression Policies and Federal Sentencing Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 1155-1180
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S Nowacki ◽  
Danielle Creech ◽  
Megan Parks
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ethnic Diversity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Racial Threat ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
The Us ◽  
Voter Suppression ◽  
And Gender

Abstract Many states in the United States have recently implemented voter suppression policies, which make voting more difficult, particularly for members of marginalized populations (e.g. non-white and female voters). In this article, we examine how these policies and other measures of political climate influence criminal sentencing in US district courts. Using 2015 data from the US Sentencing Commission, alongside other district-level measures, we find both direct and conditioning relationships between political climate and extra-legal variables. Specifically, we find that, while voter suppression policies do not directly affect sentence length, racial threat effects are enhanced in districts governed by such policies. Conversely, districts without such policies see larger mitigating effects at high levels of ethnic diversity and gender equality.

7 Immunity, 7.6 Prewitt Enterprises, Inc. v Org. of Petroleum Exporting Countries , 353 F.3d 916 (11th Cir. 2003)

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boon Kristen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Member State ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Domestic Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Effective Service

This case addresses effective service of process of an international organization by a non-member state. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit relied upon the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) because the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not fall within the purview of the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA) and no other applicable treaty existed regarding the treatment of the OPEC in a United States domestic court. The decision’s reliance upon FRCP and application of foreign law resulted in the inability of the plaintiffs to bring a claim against the OPEC without its express consent.

International Law in the American Courts – Khulumani v. Barclay National Bank Ltd.: The Decision Heard ‘Round the Corporate World

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 639-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Hutchens
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Civil Action ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Corporate World ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
National Bank ◽  
Federal Jurisdiction

On June 30, 1980, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued Filártiga v. Peña-Irala. In this landmark case, the Paraguayan plaintiffs sought to hold Americo Norbeto Peña-Irala, a high-ranking Paraguayan police officer, liable for torture that led to the death of Joel Filártiga in Paraguay. They rested their main jurisdictional argument “upon the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, which provides: ‘The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.'” The Second Circuit held, “[D]eliberate torture perpetrated under color of official authority violates universally accepted norms of the international law of human rights, regardless of the nationality of the parties. Thus, whenever an alleged torturer is found and served with process by an alien within our borders, § 1350 provides federal jurisdiction.” It added that “Our holding today, giving effect to a jurisdictional provision enacted by our First Congress, is a small but important step in the fulfillment of the ageless dream to free all people from brutal violence.”

scholarly journals Civil Procedure of Trademark Enforcement in Pakistan: A Comparative Analysis with Malaysia and USA

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 95
Author(s):  
Sohaib Mukhtar ◽  
Zinatul Ashiqin Zainol ◽  
Sufian Jusoh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
District Court ◽  
Registered Trademark ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Civil Suit ◽  
Prompt Action

<em>Civil procedure of trademark enforcement runs in Pakistan under Trade Marks Ordinance 2001, Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and Specific Relief Act 1877. Trademark is one of the components of Intellectual Property Law, it is a mark, name, sign, smell or a sound which distinguishes goods and services of one undertaking from goods and services of other undertakings. It is required to be distinctiveness and non-descriptive, it losses its distinctiveness when owner of registered trademark does not take prompt action against its infringement. The registered trademark owner may file civil suit against infringement of his registered trademark before the concerned District Court of Law for claiming damages and obtaining injunctions. The Trademark Registry works under Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan (IPO-Pakistan) for registration and protection of trademarks in Pakistan. Similarly, Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) is empowered agency of trademark registration and its protection in Malaysia. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is responsible for registration and protection of trademarks in United States of America (USA). Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) is the only International Treaty which contains exhaustive provisions on trademark enforcement includes civil procedure, administrative procedure, criminal procedure, provisional and border measures. Important civil procedure of trademark enforcement issues need to be clarified in trademark law of Pakistan includes trademark infringement, trademark dilution and rectification of trademark register. This article is comparative analysis of civil procedure of trademark enforcement in Pakistan, Malaysia and USA.</em>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document