Query from a colleague last week: hey, Aaron, settle a bet for me. Does Switzerland object to Article 10(a) of the Hague Service Convention?
“Emphatically,” I responded. And went on to tell him that if he tried serving his Swiss defendant by mail, the time it would take to quash it could be clocked with an egg timer. Continue Reading Hague Service Convention Article 10 methods: make sure they’re valid!
A primer for defense counsel here– but a cautionary tale for plaintiffs’ lawyers as well. [With a focus on federal practice, particularly Rule 4… state rules vary, but not by much.]
Hey, Aaron, how do you quash Hague service? Continue Reading How to Quash Hague Service
(This really does apply to Hague Service. I promise.)
I flew into this mess on July 24th at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam. We sat on the tarmac for two hours waiting for a gate to clear for us, and another half hour at the gate waiting for a qualified jetway driver to provide a means of egress. Then the real fun started. Three more hours in the baggage claim area, before coming to the unfortunate conclusion that Icelandair had somehow misplaced my gear. No worries, I thought. They’ll get this mess sorted out and bring my suitcase to my hotel in The Hague tomorrow. My most important meeting isn’t until the next day.
Whoa, was I wrong. Continue Reading Hague Service Certificates… a bit like waiting for lost luggage.
The most critical question in serving a defendant is “WHERE?” More specifically…
Continue Reading “Where?” is critical, Episode 1: The British Isles
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 he rebooted an older column in Four Essential Principles of Emerging Market Success. His original (2004) commentary is even more prescient today as manufacturers and investors shift away from China and seek new opportunities in other emerging economies like Vietnam, Turkey, and Indonesia, just to name a trio. As it turned out, when I read Dan’s update, I had just seen a prospective client walk away from a discussion because he didn’t like the bad news I had to give him. That news went to the heart of Dan’s thoughts on doing business anywhere abroad, namely: Things will be different. Very different.
Continue Reading Things take longer overseas. Get used to it.
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 daily lives, so it’s still critical to understand the ways in which foreign systems operate. We still have to sell our stuff abroad, or our economy will collapse in short order. We still have to get all the K-Pop we can absorb.
Continue Reading Things are different overseas. Get used to it.
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 the 1959 Communist Revolution. Earlier this year, I posted the following illustration of how such a suit plays out:
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 English!”
Perhaps, but he lives in Germany now, and you’re serving him there. Germany requires translation into German, without regard to the defendant’s competence in English.
(Yet they continue to push.)
It happens all the time.
I’ll give a lecture or mention what I do at a bar association event, and the colleague I just met will express appreciation for what I do, tell me it’s a really neat niche, and then try to convince himself that our practice areas don’t overlap. I’m here to tell you that, yes, they do. But it’s tough to convince highly experienced professionals that something outside their wheelhouse might be a challenge in the not-too-distant future.
The conversation usually goes something like this:
Sorry, Aaron. I’m an estate planning lawyer. I’ll never need to serve anybody in a foreign country. But thanks for doing that CLE. You’re a funny guy. (Funny how? I’m a clown? I amuse you?) No, I mean I really like how you got that picture of Boromir into your slide deck!
Wait a sec, there, pal. It’s likely that you’ll eventually have to serve abroad someday. Ever represent a client who wants to contest the Last Will and Testament of an estranged relative? (Yes.) How about if that will that leaves the decedent’s prize collection of Elvis Presley memorabilia to his Cousin Seamus in Dublin? Think someone might have to serve ol’ Seamus? (Hmmmm.) Bear with me here…
It doesn’t matter what court is handling the case– estate litigation is still litigation. And if you need to hale into court an individual heir (or devisee or… whatever the state-specific term is for cousin Seamus) who is outside the United States, you’re going to have to know how to do it the right way.
If you have any sort of adverse party abroad– or even someone whose interest align with your client’s, but who must be served certain notice or pleadings– strict rules must be observed.
Estate litigation is still litigation.
So how do you do that?
It bears repeating. The Hague Service Convention controls how all this gets done wherever it applies. It’s a treaty, to which the United States is a party, and which entered into force right about the time my mom graduated from high school. Thanks to the Supremacy Clause, its strictures trump lesser laws. A gentle reminder:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. (Art. VI-2)
(Emphasis mine.)
Serving in Ireland is pretty straightforward. We prep the documents for service under Article 10(b), send them to my Irish solicitor, and he takes it from there.
