Legal Opinion
Scarminach v. Goldwell GmbH
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 22, 1988PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
David O. Boehm, J.
Whether discovery against a defendant, West German cor*104poration, should proceed in accordance with the procedures of the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (opened for signature, Mar. 18, 1970, 23 UST 2555, TIAS No. 7444 [hereinafter Hague Convention or Convention]) or New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules, raises an issue of first impression, given the recent interpretation of the Convention by the United States Supreme Court in Societe National Industrielle Aerospatiale v United States Dist. Ct. (482 US…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. PinkSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. United States District Court for the Southern District of IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Curtis v. Complete Foam Insulation Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Green v. Kautex Machines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Sandsend Financial Consultants, Ltd. v. Wood, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In Re: Automotive Refinishing Paint Antitrust Litigation Basf Ag and Basf Coatings AgCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004
- American Home Assurance Co. v. Société Commerciale ToutélectricCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ltd. v. KvaernerNew York Supreme Court · 1998
- In Re: Automotive Refinishing Paint Antitrust Litigation Basf Ag and Basf Coatings AgCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004