International Comity

153 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• The Drexel Burnham Lambert Grp. Inc. v. A.W. Galadari and A.W. Galadari Commodities
  777 F.2d 877· 2d Cir.· 1985-12-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that dismissal based on international comity was unwarranted without further development of the record and an evidentiary hearing, but affirmed dismissal of other grounds.
• Adams Apple Distrib. Co. v. Papeleras Reunidas, S.A.
  773 F.2d 925· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-27 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of consequential damages for breach of contract and the imposition of a lien on the defendant's trademarks, finding no error in either decision.
• SEA Containers Ltd. v. Stena AB
  890 F.2d 1205· D.C. Cir.· 1989-12-01 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction against Stena's tender offer, as it lacked a legal basis, and that Stena failed to demonstrate sufficient irreparable harm to warrant a preliminary injunction requiring further disclosures under the
• In re Mr. and Mrs. DOE v. United States
  860 F.2d 40· 2d Cir.· 1988-10-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the Marcoses' head-of-state immunity was waived by the Philippine government and that they could not invoke the Philippine Constitution's self-incrimination privilege under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for a U.S. grand jury investigation.
• United States v. First Nat'l City Bank
  321 F.2d 14· 2d Cir.· 1963-06-26 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court had the power to issue an injunction restraining a bank from disposing of a taxpayer's property, even if held by its foreign branches, as long as the bank itself was subject to the court's personal jurisdiction.
• Eastman Kodak Co. v. Kavlin
  978 F. Supp. 1078· S.D. Fla.· 1997-09-09 ·cited 10×
  The court partially granted and denied motions to dismiss, retaining jurisdiction but dismissing some Bolivian law claims and deferring a personal jurisdiction ruling.
• Cannon v. U.S. Dep't of Just.
  973 F.2d 1190· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-17 ·cited 10×
  The United States Parole Commission, not the Bureau of Prisons, must compute release dates for prisoners transferred under the Treaty, taking into account foreign good-time credits and applying U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(b) when the foreign sentence exceeds the guideline range.
• In re Ins. Antitrust Litig. ACE Check Cashing, Inc. v. AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  938 F.2d 919· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-18 ·cited 10×
  The court denied a motion for rehearing, holding that the purpose of Florida's Unauthorized Insurers Process Law is not limited to protecting Florida residents, but also applies to non-residents.
• In re Sealed Case
  832 F.2d 1268· D.C. Cir.· 1987-11-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Independent Counsel must establish personal jurisdiction over the foreign companies before compelling their custodian to produce records, and that the custodian may invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege if the act of production has testimonial implications
• Associated Container Transp. (australia) Ltd. v. United States
  705 F.2d 53· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and the act of state doctrine do not bar the Justice Department from enforcing Civil Investigative Demands at this preliminary stage of an antitrust investigation.
• In re Banco Santander Securities-Optimal Litigation
  732 F. Supp. 2d 1305· S.D. Fla.· 2010-07-30 ·cited 9×
  The court granted six defendants' motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and dismissed the case under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, finding Ireland to be a more convenient forum.
• Nat'l Bank OF Canada v. Interbank Card Ass'n & Bank of Montreal
  666 F.2d 6· 2d Cir.· 1981-02-20 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the Sherman Act claim, finding no sufficient anticompetitive effect on United States commerce. The contract claims were affirmed on the district court's reasoning.
• Cermesoni v. Maneiro
  144 So. 3d 627· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-08-06 ·cited 8×
  In a family law matter where an Argentine court issued a freeze order on Miami bank accounts via letters rogatory, the Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to increase the injunction bond, holding that Florida's ancillary role in enf
• In re Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale & Societe de Constr. d'Avions de Tourism
  782 F.2d 120· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-22 ·cited 8×
  The Hague Convention does not apply to discovery requests directed at a foreign litigant over whom a U.S. court has jurisdiction, even if the information is located abroad, and a foreign blocking statute does not automatically preclude a U.S. court from compelling discovery.
• Tsakonites v. Transpacific Carriers Corp. & Hellenic Lines, Ltd.
  368 F.2d 426· 2d Cir.· 1966-11-16 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would hold that United States law should apply to a foreign-registered vessel owned by a resident alien shipowner when the injury occurs in U.S. territorial waters.
• Dist. OF Columbia v. Int'l Distrib. Corp.
  331 F.2d 817· D.C. Cir.· 1964-03-19 ·cited 8×
  A wholesaler of imported alcoholic beverages is not liable for District of Columbia excise taxes on sales to foreign embassies and international organizations when the beverages are withdrawn from a bonded warehouse under specific permits.
• Leighnor v. C.A. Turner
  884 F.2d 385· 8th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 7×
  The Parole Commission's consideration of the defendant's pre-extradition escape and use of a false passport to enhance his parole guideline range did not violate the rule of specialty.
• O.N.E. Shipping Ltd. v. Flota Mercante Grancolombiana, S.A.
  830 F.2d 449· 2d Cir.· 1987-10-01 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Foreign Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 does not preclude jurisdiction over conduct that has a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on U.S. commerce, and that international comity does not require dismissal when U.S. antitrust laws are
• Mother Doe I v. Al Maktoum
  632 F. Supp. 2d 1130· S.D. Fla.· 2007-07-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants because the plaintiffs failed to establish that the corporate activities could be attributed to the individual defendants under Florida law.
• Bautista v. Star Cruises
  286 F. Supp. 2d 1352· S.D. Fla.· 2003-10-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Federal Arbitration Act's seamen exemption does not apply to the Convention Act, and that the arbitration agreements at issue are enforceable under the Convention Act.
• In re Enercons Va., Inc. v. Davide Farinacci
  812 F.2d 1469· 4th Cir.· 1987-03-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that 11 U.S.C. § 304 is not the exclusive remedy for a foreign representative seeking cooperation from a U.S. bankruptcy court, and that comity can be extended to foreign court orders even if ex parte, provided the foreign proceedings are fair.
• PAN E. Exploration Co. & Anadarko Petroleum Corp. v. Hufo Oils
  798 F.2d 837· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the denial of a motion to dismiss based on international comity is not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine because it does not grant an entitlement not to stand trial.
• In re Messerschmitt Bolkow Blohm GmbH
  757 F.2d 729· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-18 ·cited 6×
  The Hague Convention does not apply to discovery sought in U.S. courts from foreign parties subject to U.S. jurisdiction, even if documents are abroad or witnesses reside abroad, as long as the discovery occurs within the U.S.
• In re Marc Rich & Co. v. United States
  736 F.2d 864· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant is barred by agreement and res judicata from relying on Swiss law to excuse noncompliance with the subpoena, but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether subsequent Swiss seizures made compliance impossible.
• Dracos v. Hellenic Lines Ltd.
  705 F.2d 1392· 4th Cir.· 1983-04-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that collateral estoppel does not apply to facts regarding a shipowner's base of operations and American contacts when there has been a significant lapse of time, due to the dynamic nature of the shipping industry.
• Rintin Corp. v. Domar, Ltd.
  374 F. Supp. 2d 1165· S.D. Fla.· 2005-06-13 ·cited 5×
  The court confirmed the arbitration award, denying the motion to vacate, finding no grounds under the Florida International Arbitration Act to set aside the award.
• Makro Cap. of Am., Inc. v. Ubs Ag
  372 F. Supp. 2d 623· S.D. Fla.· 2005-05-18 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the Trading with the Enemy Act prohibits the return of vested property or its proceeds to former owners or their successors, and that the plaintiff lacked standing to assert claims on behalf of third parties.
• Marti v. Iberostar Hoteles Y Apartamentos SL
  54 F.4th 641· 11th Cir.· 2022-11-21 ·cited 4×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court's indefinite stay of proceedings, which effectively removed the plaintiff from federal court, was immoderate and unlawful, requiring vacation of the stay.
• In re Application of Asta Medica, S.A.
  981 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1992-12-04 ·cited 4×
  A litigant requesting assistance under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 must demonstrate that the information sought in the United States would be discoverable under the laws of the foreign jurisdiction.
• Arco Elecs. Control Ltd. v. Core Int'l
  794 F. Supp. 1144· S.D. Fla.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 4×
  Service of process by registered mail to a defendant in the United States does not comply with the Hague Convention, as Article 10(a) permits the 'sending' of documents, not formal 'service'.
• Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. United States Dist. Court FOR the Dist. OF Alaska
  788 F.2d 1408· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-01 ·cited 4×
  The Hague Convention is not the exclusive means for obtaining documents located abroad, and U.S. courts can order discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when they have jurisdiction over a foreign litigant.
• Williams v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.
  694 F.2d 300· 3d Cir.· 1982-11-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the act of state doctrine does not bar this antitrust suit because adjudication would not hinder U.S. foreign relations, despite the district court's misinterpretation of precedent.
• Egi-Vsr, LLC v. Mitjans
  963 F.3d 1112· 11th Cir.· 2020-06-25 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to quash service of process, but it vacated and remanded the order confirming the arbitration award due to errors in its enforcement.
• Cheng Na-Yuet v. Hueston
  734 F. Supp. 988· S.D. Fla.· 1990-03-28 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the magistrate had jurisdiction to certify extradition and that the government of Hong Kong had shown sufficient probable cause, denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Grunfeder v. Heckler
  708 F.2d 458· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-14 ·cited 3×
  German reparations paid for injury to body and health pursuant to the German Restitution Act constitute countable 'income' for determining eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits under the Social Security Act.
• Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. Unidentified
  727 F. Supp. 2d 1341· M.D. Fla.· 2010-07-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it has in rem jurisdiction over artifacts already brought within its territorial jurisdiction but lacks jurisdiction over artifacts remaining in international waters, thus granting title only to the former.
• Sec. Exch. Comm'n v. Pension Fund of Am., L.C.
  613 F. Supp. 2d 1341· S.D. Fla.· 2009-04-24 ·cited 2×
  The court granted the receiver's motion for an anti-suit injunction, enjoining the defendant from proceeding with foreign civil litigation that interferes with the receivership proceedings and the court's jurisdiction.
• United States v. Benitez
  28 F. Supp. 2d 1361· S.D. Fla.· 1998-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and international principles of non bis in idem, comity, and abstention do not bar the United States from prosecuting individuals for an offense for which they were already tried and convicted in a foreign country.
• Casey v. Dep't OF State
  980 F.2d 1472· D.C. Cir.· 1992-12-18 ·cited 2×
  While a U.S. court has jurisdiction to hear a claim that U.S. government misconduct in seeking extradition led to a citizen's detention, the claim was properly dismissed because the alleged misrepresentation did not proximately cause the extradition.
• Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. The United States
  898 F.2d 780· Fed. Cir.· 1990-03-13 ·cited 2×
  Verification exhibits collected by the Department of Commerce during administrative reviews are considered 'business proprietary information' subject to disclosure under an administrative protective order, and a 'clear and compelling need' to withhold them must be shown on a case
• Am. Rice, Inc. v. The Ark. Rice Growers Coop. Ass'n
  701 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Lanham Act applies to trademark infringement by a U.S. corporation occurring in a foreign country if it affects U.S. commerce, and that the doctrine of forum non conveniens was not applicable.
• The Republic OF Ecuador v. Roberto Isaías Dassum and William Isaías Dassum
  146 So. 3d 58· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-07-02 ·cited 1×
  The Republic of Ecuador appeals a summary judgment dismissing its $200 million claim against two former Ecuadorian bankers residing in Miami, based on the act of state doctrine. The court reversed, holding that Ecuador's complaint seeking a money judgment does not violate the ext
• Young v. Norwegian Seafarers' Union
  138 So. 3d 1189· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-05-21 ·cited 1×
  Foreign seafarers employed on a foreign-flagged cruise ship challenged the validity of a collective bargaining agreement negotiated by their union, seeking declaratory relief under Florida law. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that labor disputes between foreign unions and f
• Tettamanti v. Opcion Sociedad Anonima
  67 So. 3d 356· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-07-20 ·cited 1×
  Tettamanti and Calvo appealed the denial of their motion to vacate a Florida court's recognition of an Argentine money judgment against them. The court affirmed, holding that post-recognition collateral attacks should ordinarily be directed to the foreign court rather than the Fl
• Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. Unidentified
  675 F. Supp. 2d 1126· M.D. Fla.· 2009-12-22 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) bars jurisdiction over the shipwreck and its contents, as they are the property of Spain and not subject to U.S. court adjudication.
• TNT USA, Inc. v. TrafiExpress
  2006 WL 1581986· S.D. Fla.· 2006-04-03 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Lanham Act can apply extraterritorially in this case, and that Mexico is not the more convenient forum, thus denying the motion to dismiss.
• Rintin Corp. v. Domar, Ltd.
  370 F. Supp. 2d 1277· S.D. Fla.· 2005-05-24 ·cited 1×
  The court confirmed the arbitral award, denying the plaintiff's motion to vacate, finding no grounds under the Florida International Arbitration Act to set aside the award.
• Labor Union OF Pico Korea, Ltd. v. Pico Prods., Inc.
  968 F.2d 191· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act does not apply extraterritorially to labor contracts involving foreign employees of a foreign subsidiary, even if the parent company is American and the industry affects commerce.
• GAU Shan Co., Ltd. v. Bankers Tr. Co.
  956 F.2d 1349· 6th Cir.· 1992-02-24 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision to grant an injunction, finding that the Laker Airways test properly balanced international comity with the integrity of U.S. laws and jurisdiction.
• Daryel Buesking v. Aloschi Bros. SRL
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-10-06
  The court held that it has admiralty jurisdiction over the tort claim, but lacks personal jurisdiction over SNAV due to invalid maritime attachments, while Aloschi sufficiently stated a claim for negligence.