The most critical question in serving a defendant is “WHERE?” More specifically…
Today’s cartographic dilemma: The British Isles. Essentially, two
The most critical question in serving a defendant is “WHERE?” More specifically…
Let’s face it–
Last week, I went on a bit of a rant— my thinking was sparked by a highly informative post by Dan Harris at the China Law Blog, in which
I say all the time that we ain’t building rockets here. But we are building a ship of sorts, and a leaky vessel means the cargo may not make it to its destination. Serving process
With all the America-First hype swirling about the country, it’s never been more important to remind lawyers that things simply don’t work over there the same way they work here. Global commerce isn’t going away, folks. Tariffs notwithstanding, we still need goods from abroad to carry on our
Big in the news of late: Huawei and the Trump Administration’s ban.
The Trump Administration has fully implemented Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, which allows suits to proceed in U.S. courts against companies that do business in Cuba and profit from the use of property expropriated after
Last fall, I posted “FSIA Service… it’s really not that difficult” following several very poorly titled articles describing the Trump Administration’s support of a foreign government’s argument in a sovereign immunity case. Sudan had asserted that
Here we go again. I’ve written before in this space that, yes, counsel, you do have to translate that thing.
But resistance keeps coming up in the legal community: “oh, come on, the defendant lived in Chicago* for twelve years– the guy speaks
We ain’t building rockets here. But we are building a ship of sorts, and a leaky hull means the cruise ship might not get you to that cabana sheltered rum drink you’ve been craving. Serving process in the British Virgin
