Tag Archives: Hong Kong

Case of the Day: Plastech Holding Corp. v. WM Greentech

The case of the day is Plastech Holding Corp. v. WM Greentech Automotive Corp. (E.D. Mich. 2016). PHC sued WM Industries Corp., GreenTech Automotive Corp., and GreenTech Automotive Inc. JAC Motors, a non-party, sought to intervene in the case, but PHC opposed its motion, because the contract between JAC and PHC had an agreement calling for arbitration in Hong Kong. The motion for leave to intervene was allowed, and PHC amended its complaint to state a claim against JAC. PHC then served notices for depositions of eleven JAC witnesses who resided in Taiwan. The notices called for the depositions to take place in Michigan.
Continue reading Case of the Day: Plastech Holding Corp. v. WM Greentech

Case of the Day: In re O’Keeffe

Sheldon Adelson
Credit: Bectrigger

The case of the day is In re O’Keeffe (2d Cir. 2016). This is another § 1782 case in the Sheldon Adelson libel case against journalist Kate O’Keefee, who wrote that he was “foul-mouthed.” The suit was pending in Hong Kong. O’Keeffe sought leave to serve a subpoena on Adelson’s former driver, Kwame Luangisa, presumably in the hope that Luangisa could testify that Adelson was indeed foul-mouthed. The application was routine, and the court correctly affirmed the decision denying Adelson’s motion to quash.

I’ve written about several previous similar decisions in this case. What’s great about these cases is that the Adelson, the libel plaintiff, sued in Hong Kong instead of in the United States even though, presumably, he could have sued the Wall Street Journal in the United States. But through the magic of § 1782, O’Keeffe more or less had some of the same procedural advantages she would have had had the suit been brought in the United States.

Case of the Day: Resorts World v. Chan

The case of the day is Resorts World at Sentosa Pte Ltd. v. Chan (D. Hawaii 2016). Resorts World sued Chan in the Singapore High Court on a debt. The Singaporean court entered judgment for Resorts World for $882,644. Resorts World brought an action for recognition and enforcement in Hawaii. Chan moved to dismiss for insufficient service of process. She also asserted that the Singapore judgment was void because she had not properly been served with process in that proceeding, and that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.
Continue reading Case of the Day: Resorts World v. Chan