Comments on: Hague Service and Evidence Conventions: The US Central Authority’s Unusual Interpretation https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/12/10/hague-service-evidence-conventions-us-central-authoritys-unusual-interpretation/ The Blog of International Judicial Assistance Wed, 05 Oct 2016 10:00:23 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Case of the Day: Judicial Authority of Ohio v. Mann | Letters Blogatory https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/12/10/hague-service-evidence-conventions-us-central-authoritys-unusual-interpretation/#comment-2085 Wed, 05 Oct 2016 10:00:23 +0000 https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=19657#comment-2085 […] Similarly, if the letter of request was a request for service in Israel of a US subpoena, see, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1783, then the letter of request would have been improper under the Evidence Convention because service is a matter for the Service Convention. (I dealt with a similar situation in December 2014). […]

]]> By: Ted Folkman https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/12/10/hague-service-evidence-conventions-us-central-authoritys-unusual-interpretation/#comment-2084 Tue, 31 Mar 2015 21:10:21 +0000 https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=19657#comment-2084 In reply to Alejandro Osuna.

Thanks, Alejandro, for the comment. Can you say more? I’m not entirely sure what you mean.

]]> By: Alejandro Osuna https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/12/10/hague-service-evidence-conventions-us-central-authoritys-unusual-interpretation/#comment-2083 Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:37:28 +0000 https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=19657#comment-2083 In response to your question, we did not know…. Now we do.

]]>