-
Case of the Day: Prism Investments BV v. van der Meer
Conflict of Laws.net had a post on a recent decision of the European Court of Justice, Prism Investments BV v. van der Meer. The facts were as follows: A Finnish bank loaned money to Arilco Opportune, which in turn lent the money to its Netherlands subsidiary, Arilco Holland. Arilco Holland transferred the funds to Prism……
-
Case of the Day: Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi & Bros. v. Standard Chartered Int’l
The case of the day is Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi & Brothers Co. v. Standard Chartered International (USA) Ltd. (S.D.N.Y. 2011). While the New York case involved a request for judicial assistance, the underlying case, pending in the Cayman Islands and in Saudi Arabia, is a colorful tale of alleged fraud. AHAB, a Saudi Arabian general……
-
Case of the Day: Barnett v. Miguel
The case of the day, Barnett v. Miguel (D. Idaho 2011), is another example of the trouble US plaintiffs can have in attempting service of process in Mexico. The plaintiffs, Jerry Ray and Barnett and Richard Getty, sued three Mexican defendants, Alfredo Miguel, Pepe Miguel, and Alfredo Miguel Jr., alleging racketeering under Idaho law. The……
-
Case of the Day: Strauss v. Credit Lyonnais
The case of the day, Strauss v. Credit Lyonnais, S.A. (E.D.N.Y. 2011), raises issues we have not previously considered. The plaintiffs were American victims of terrorist attacks carried out in Jerusalem by Hamas, and members of their family. They sued Credit Lyonnais under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1992, alleging that the bank had provided material……
-
Case of the Day: TracFone Wireless v. Doe
The case of the day TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. Doe (S.D. Fla. 2011), is one of those rare cases that is so wrong that I hope it does not get into the F. Supp.2d, so as to avoid misleading lawyers. First, a summary of the case. Tracfone filed a John Doe complaint against unknown defendants……