Case of the Day: Dahman v. Embassy of Qatar

The case of the day is Dahman v. Embassy of Qatar (D.D.C. 2019). I wrote about the case last year. El-Sayed Dahman, an accountant, worked for the Embassy of Qatar. The embassy terminated his employment, perhaps as a matter of policy due to his age, and he brought an action for age discrimination. So far, so good. There are, unfortunately, foreign governments that discriminate on the basis of age as a matter of policy when employing people in the United States, and the cases generally say that if the employee’s employment is “commercial” (factors can include the nationality of the worker, the nature of his or her duties, etc.), there is no FSIA immunity in such a case because of the commercial activity exception. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Dahman v. Embassy of Qatar

In re BRF Securities Litigation

The case of the day is In re BRF S.A. Securities Litigation (S.D.N.Y. 2019). The lead plaintiff is the Birmingham Retirement and Relief System. It brought an action against BRF, a poultry exporter in Brazil, whose American depository receipts traded on the NYSE. The claim was that BRF and its executives bribed regulators and officials in Brazil, which led to an investigation and criminal charges there. Birmingham brought securities fraud claims, alleging that BRF had made materially misleading statements and omissions. It also sued BRF’s former officers and directors. (more…)

Continue ReadingIn re BRF Securities Litigation
Read more about the article Case of the Day: Fourte International v. Pin Shine Industrial
Letters Blogatory wishes its readers a happy Martin Luther King Day!

Case of the Day: Fourte International v. Pin Shine Industrial

The case of the day is Fourte International Ltd. BVI v. Pin Shine Industrial Co. (S.D. Cal. 2019). Fourte brought an action against Suzhou Pinshine Technology Co., Suzhou Sunshine Technology Co., Ltd., and Pin Shine Industrial Co., and Bobbin & Tooling Electronics International Company of BVI. It sought leave to serve Suzhou Pinshine and Suzhou Sunshine, both Chinese firms, via email. Foutre noted that that the central authority would refuse to serve the documents because they referenced Taiwan, which of course the PRC does not recognize. It also sought leave to serve Pin Shine, a Taiwanese company, by email. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Fourte International v. Pin Shine Industrial

Case of the Day: New Prime Inc. v. Oliveiera

Supreme Court building in the evening
Credit: Joe Ravi (CC BY-SA)

I hope my post on Monday didn’t mislead you. I suggested that parties arguing in favor of arbitration generally win in the Supreme Court. But as today’s case, New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira (S. Ct. 2019), shows, they don’t always win.

Oliveira was an independent contractor working as a truck driver for New Prime, an interstate trucking company. The contract between the parties had an arbitration clause. Oliveira sued New Prime, purportedly on behalf of a class, arguing that New Prime treated its drivers as employees, not contractors, and that it failed to pay them the minimum wage. New Prime moved to compel arbitration. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: New Prime Inc. v. Oliveiera

Case of the Day: Patrick’s Restaurant v. Singh

The White Whale

The case of the day is Patrick’s Restaurant, LLC v. Singh (D. Minn. 2019). The case is in the genre of Hague Service Convention cases that I love to hate—cases following the lead of Gurung v. Malhotra, my white whale of international judicial assistance. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Patrick’s Restaurant v. Singh

Case of the Day: Henry Schein v. Archer & White Sales

Supreme Court building in the evening
Credit: Joe Ravi (CC BY-SA)

They say that a new Supreme Court justice’s first opinion is usually a softball. So the fact that today’s case of the day, Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc. (S. Ct. 2019), was assigned to Justice Kavanaugh was probably a good indication of how the case was bound to come out: continuing the trend of many years in the Supreme Court, the party seeking to enforce an agreement to arbitrate as written prevailed.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Henry Schein v. Archer & White Sales

Case of the Day: African Growth Corp. v. Angola

The case of the day is African Growth Corp. v. Republic of Angola (D.D.C. 2018). The plaintiff was a US company in the real estate business in Luanda, Angola’s capital. Its claim was that Gen. Antonio Andrade and his son, Capt. Miguel Kenehele, with their “heavily-armed security detail,” had wrongfully seized and occupied some of its properties. The plaintiff couldn’t get relief in the Angolan courts, because the government—through Gen. Andrade’s daughter, State Prosecutor Natasha Andrade Santos—refused to enforce the Angolan courts’ orders in favor of the plaintiff. In the old days, this would have been a case for novel disseisin. But these days, the case took the form of a lawsuit in the US District Court. The individual defendants failed to answer, and AGC sought a default judgment. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: African Growth Corp. v. Angola

Case of the Day: IDS Property Casualty Insurance Co. v. Gree USA

The case of the day is IDS Property Casualty Insurance Co. v. Gree USA, Inc. (D. Minn. 2018). It’s another example of bad, clearly wrong decisions on the Hague Service Convention. Chad and Andrea Murphy, who lived in Minnesota, owned a dehumidifier manufactured by Gree Electric Appliances, Inc. of Zuhai, a Chinese firm. It allegedly caused a fire. The Murphys’ insurer, IDS, paid their claim and brought a product liability claim against Gree as their subrogee. They served process by serving the documents on a person physically present in the California, and their claim was that under California law, that service was sufficient to effect service on the Chinese firm. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: IDS Property Casualty Insurance Co. v. Gree USA