-
Case of the Day: American Express v. Rui
The case of the day is American Express Co. v. Rui (D. Ariz. 2019). Amex brought a claim against Xiongwen Rui, a former executive, seeking to claw back compensation Rui had received before quitting and going to work for a Chinese competitor. After several failed attempts at service, Amex brought a motion to serve process…
-
Case of the Day: Genus Lifesciences v. Tapaysa Engineering
The case of the day is Genus Lifesciences Inc. v. Tapaysa Eng’g Works Pvt. Ltd. (E.D. Pa. 2021). Genus brought a commercial claim against Tapaysa, an Indian company. It sought to serve process via the Indian central authority but was unsuccessful. Or perhaps it would be better to say that it has been unsuccessful thus far: it…
-
Case of the Day: Minor v. Juarez
The case of the day is Minor v. Juarez (D.N.M. 2021). David Minor sued Luis Alberto Ramirez Juarez for negligence on account of an automobile accident in Santa Teresa, New Mexico. Minor sued in the state court in El Paso Texas. Ramirez, who resided in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, removed the case to the US District Court for…
-
Case of the Day: Banque de Tahiti v. Kurth
The case of the day is Banque de Tahiti v. Kurth (Haw. Ct. App. 2017). The Bank of Tahiti had a judgment against Filola Kurth, the representative of the estate of Thomas Kurth, from the Civil Court of First Instance of Papeete, the capital of French Polynesia. The Bank filed the judgment in Hawaii in…
-
Case of the Day: Rosales v. FitFlop USA, LLC
The case of the day is Rosales v. FitFlopUSA, LLC (S.D. Cal. 2013). Rosales, who had bought FitFlop footware, sued the company, alleging that FitFlop had represented “that its products will provide wearers with a variety of health benefits, but in reality FitFlop Footware does not provide the promised benefits and may actually cause or…