[Details have been changed to protect the innocent. Some variant of this story happens routinely— at least every couple of months.]
A few weeks ago, I received a Hague Certificate following a request that I’d sent on a client’s behalf to a foreign Central
Y’all, if you know you’re going to be removed, just initiate the case in federal court to begin with. It’ll save everybody involved a whole bunch of time and headache.
A routine question from clients across the continent– especially those in my own state*: “Hey, Aaron, the clerk says I have to tell the court
Client queries: “hey, Aaron, the clerk says the Hague Service Convention requires certified copies of the Summons and Complaint and something called an Apostille. Where do I get that?”
I get some variant
Last month, in Only serve what is REQUIRED, I suggested insisted that service costs can go through the roof if plaintiff’s counsel seeks to serve documents that aren’t strictly mandated by local rule.*
Routine practice dictates that, along with the Summons and Complaint, additional documents must be served as well. ECF Rules, civil cover
Last month, I posted that, yes, foreign authorities actually read translated documents— and if
Way back in March, 2017, I posted a blurb about the limitations on serving offshore parent companies via their U.S. subsidiaries. In short, I argue, you can’t simply serve a U.S. subsidiary and call it effective on the foreign parent. You have to have a compelling reason to pierce the corporate veil.
This is basic
Hague Service Convention requests constitute 99% of my practice– that’s a literal statistic.* Easily half of them are sent to
Ah… faith in humanity restored. Just a bit.
In a rant yesterday (NO, 4(f)(3) is NOT co-equal to Hague channels!), I took issue with the impossibly bad logic in another order approving electronic service on a Chinese
Yet another one popped up on the old radar (Google news alerts) yesterday… a National Law Review article highlighted Victaulic Company v. Allied Rubber & Gasket Co., Inc. in S.D. Cal., but the author’s conclusion was far too optimistic for plaintiffs seeking a
