<?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: A Letter Of Request Embodies Comity	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://lettersblogatory.com/2023/06/08/a-letter-of-request-embodies-comity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2023/06/08/a-letter-of-request-embodies-comity/</link>
	<description>The Blog of International Judicial Assistance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Sep 2024 15:10:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: Autotech v. Carbopress  &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2023/06/08/a-letter-of-request-embodies-comity/#comment-19342</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: Autotech v. Carbopress  &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Sep 2024 15:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=31717#comment-19342</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] interpreter interpret the proceedings. A letter of request is just that, a request, not an order. It embodies comity. The judge ordered Carbopress to submit a revised proposed letter of request that requested, not [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] interpreter interpret the proceedings. A letter of request is just that, a request, not an order. It embodies comity. The judge ordered Carbopress to submit a revised proposed letter of request that requested, not [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: Ben Haim v. Doe &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2023/06/08/a-letter-of-request-embodies-comity/#comment-6037</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: Ben Haim v. Doe &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2023 11:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://lettersblogatory.com/?p=31717#comment-6037</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] The court also approved issuance of the let­ter of request after an Aérospa­tiale analy­sis. It may seem hope­less, but I want to reit­er­ate my view that it makes no sense to go through the Aérospa­tiale fac­tors when decid­ing whether to issue a let­ter of request for dis­cov­ery from a non-par­ty. The point of Aérospa­tiale is to help courts decide whether for­eign par­ties should have to respond to US dis­cov­ery requests or whether the par­ty seek­ing evi­dence should have to resort first to the Evi­dence Con­ven­tion, as a mat­ter of comi­ty. If you start by say­ing that you want to serve a let­ter of request, which is after all the only way to obtain dis­cov­ery from a non-par­ty abroad, there is no comi­ty deci­sion to be made. Let­ters of request embody comi­ty. [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] The court also approved issuance of the let­ter of request after an Aérospa­tiale analy­sis. It may seem hope­less, but I want to reit­er­ate my view that it makes no sense to go through the Aérospa­tiale fac­tors when decid­ing whether to issue a let­ter of request for dis­cov­ery from a non-par­ty. The point of Aérospa­tiale is to help courts decide whether for­eign par­ties should have to respond to US dis­cov­ery requests or whether the par­ty seek­ing evi­dence should have to resort first to the Evi­dence Con­ven­tion, as a mat­ter of comi­ty. If you start by say­ing that you want to serve a let­ter of request, which is after all the only way to obtain dis­cov­ery from a non-par­ty abroad, there is no comi­ty deci­sion to be made. Let­ters of request embody comi­ty. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
