Morrison Foerster is an international law firm with lawyers practicing throughout the United States, Asia, and Europe. Click to discover more.

mofo_share_image.jpg

Morrison Foerster

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

Terms / Notices

Cookies

Privacy Policy

Attorney Advertising

Secure Login

Alumni

  Facebook

MoFo Facebook

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

Twitter

MoFo Twitter

YouTube

MoFo Youtube

Morrison Foerster - Footer

You have not solved the recaptcha challenge yet or session expired, try again.

Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/about/privacy-policy.html">Privacy Policy</a>, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

Feedback

mofo-logo-2022.svg

People

Capabilities

Resources

About

Culture

Offices

Careers

Stay Connected

Alex Lawrence spoke to Law360 about the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in ZF Automotive U.S., Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd., concluding that only foreign or international tribunals that are imbued with governmental authority fall within the ambit of Section 1782 of the U.S. Code, which allows federal courts to order entities in their districts to turn over evidence to be used in proceedings taking place before those bodies.



Questions Remain About Powerful Foreign Discovery Tool

About Morrison Forester

people-default-header-desktop.jpg

people-default-header-mobile.jpg

Default Meta Data

Alex Lawrence spoke to Law360 about the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in ZF Automotive U.S., Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd., concluding that only foreign or international tribunals that are imbued with governmental authority fall within the ambit of Section 1782 of the U.S. Code, which allows federal courts to order entities in their districts to turn over evidence to be used in proceedings taking place before those bodies.“There’s been a real explosion of 1782 litigation in the federal district courts,” Alex said, adding that the number of cases filed under the statute likely would have continued going up if the court had expanded its scope. “So there may be some aspect of closing the valve a bit.”Additionally, he noted, the court’s opinion reinforces that parties choose arbitration for a reason: It’s supposed to be faster and more efficient. There’s an understanding in arbitration that the parties to the proceeding won’t be subject to broad, U.S.-style discovery.“I think what the court’s saying is, you selected arbitration, you knew what you were getting, and you weren’t getting this,” Alex said. “You weren’t getting this right to go into the U.S. courts, and get broad third-party discovery, depositions, documents, right? And that was your choice as a party. You signed up to this when you signed up for arbitration.”Read the <a target="_blank" href="http:https://media2.mofo.com/v3/assets/blt5775cc69c999c255/bltaed2538f9cdfef34/62cdf740181754349ea311fc/220614-questions-remain-about-powerful.pdf">full article</a>.