Letters Blogatory

The Blog of International Judicial Assistance
By Ted Folkman of Folkman LLC

Ralph Gants, 1954-2020

Chief Justice Ralph Gants

Ralph Gants, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, died yesterday following a brief illness. After a career in public and private practice, he was appointed to the Superior Court in the late 1990s by Governor Weld, and then appointed to the SJC, first as associate justice and later as chief justice, by Governor Patrick. His death is a big loss to the Boston legal community. Chief Justice Gants was widely liked and admired for his fairness, his courtesy, and, if I may say, his wisdom. I had the pleasure of meeting him a few times at bar functions, where he was always generous with his time. I didn’t hear it in person, but to me Chief Justice Gants’s most memorable moment during his time on the bench was a speech he gave at the Islamic Center of Boston in 2015, shortly after he had become Chief Justice, and in the midst of great and well-founded concerns in the Muslim community in Massachusetts about the rise of Donald Trump. Judge Gants wasn’t invited to give the speech out of the blue; he asked for permission to address the congregation, in order to assure it of the support of the Commonwealth, its government, and its laws in the face of a new threat. It’s a great American speech. I covered it at the time, and I reprint it here. …

Case of the Day: TIG Insurance v. Argentina

The case of the day is TIG Insurance Co. v. Republic of Argentina (D.C. Cir. 2020). I last wrote about the case a year ago. Here was my description of the case from the prior post:

TIG had an arbitral award against Argentina and a default judgment confirming the award that, with interest and penalties, was in the amount of $33.66 million. In 2018, Argentina decided to list real property in Washington for sale. The property had previously been used as a diplomatic residence but had fallen into disrepair. TIG moved for writs of attachment and execution, but Argentina immediately thereafter took the property off the market. The question was whether the property had immunity from execution under the FSIA.