(… or, if you will, “How to not have to hire Viking Advocates when the contract sours.”)
Let’s get the disclaimers out of the way. One, this advice is legal in nature, but it is not offered to a specific person. It is general information meant to provide perspective, to highlight the vulnerabilities in
U.S. court, U.S. plaintiff, U.S. law to be applied… everything about the case is American but one: the defendant lives in Kaiserslautern. Or Basel, or Xi’an, or Yokohama—pick an overseas city. (Likewise if it’s a Canadian court, Canadian plaintiff, etc.)
When you serve a defendant in another country, you must observe the laws of that
[Originally published at vikinglaw.us]
A particular quirk arises in serving a defendant if he or she is a U.S. servicemember stationed abroad. For the most part, I explain to clients that such an objective is a tough one, so they might have to simply wait until the defendant returns to the United States. [This
[Originally published at vikinglaw.us]
Good old 12(b)(6). The Rolling Stones Rule. Failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted (I can’t get no Satisfaction).
It’s the defense litigator’s go-to basis for dismissal. Graceful, poignant, utterly classic.
Sure, the plaintiff was harmed. Sure, the defendant caused it. But there’s
[Originally published at vikinglaw.us]
The Hague Service Convention is mandatory doctrine in U.S. law. Wherever the treaty applies, plaintiffs must follow its dictates. Failure to strictly adhere means their attempts at service—whether successful or not—are ineffective. The safest avenue to a sound legal footing is by filing a request with a foreign country’s Hague
[Originally published at vikinglaw.us]
For the same reason you should refer a case out. It’s in the client’s best interest.
A friend called me a couple of months ago, and asked for my help. His wife had asked him for a divorce, and he knew that I had handled divorces before. But this one
