<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Case of the Day: WooshinmtCo v. Fu Sheng Optoelectronics	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://lettersblogatory.com/2015/01/13/case-day-wooshinmtco-v-fu-sheng-optoelectronics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2015/01/13/case-day-wooshinmtco-v-fu-sheng-optoelectronics/</link>
	<description>The Blog of International Judicial Assistance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 24 Nov 2024 03:34:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ted Folkman		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2015/01/13/case-day-wooshinmtco-v-fu-sheng-optoelectronics/#comment-2091</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ted Folkman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:12:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=19884#comment-2091</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Ivy, thanks for this post! I think it raises an interesting issue. Of course a foreign judgment will have no preclusive effect unless it is recognized&#8212;that&#039;s what recognition is for. But can it have some evidentiary effect even if it is not preclusive, if it is not recognized? I haven&#039;t studied this, but the Restatement view seems to be that at common law recognition is necessary if a party &quot;seeks to rely on prior determination of an issue of fact or law.&quot; Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States &#167; 481 cmt. b (1987).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ivy, thanks for this post! I think it raises an interesting issue. Of course a foreign judgment will have no preclusive effect unless it is recognized&mdash;that&#8217;s what recognition is for. But can it have some evidentiary effect even if it is not preclusive, if it is not recognized? I haven&#8217;t studied this, but the Restatement view seems to be that at common law recognition is necessary if a party &#8220;seeks to rely on prior determination of an issue of fact or law.&#8221; Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States &sect; 481 cmt. b (1987).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
