Hansen v. PT Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “the district court got it right in concluding that the information provided lacks an adequate foundation and therefore would be inadmissible,” where “[t]he declaration is woefully short on details”
• noting that “[a]lthough affidavits are entirely proper on summary judgment, the content or substance of the evidence contained therein must be admissible.”
• holding district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of a phone number found on a website that no longer existed to argue that statements made during calls to that number were admissible
• applying Fed. R. Evid. 902(5) to conclude that a foreign bank’s website was not self-authenticating
• finding district court did not err in excluding declaration that failed to explain how declarant had personal knowledge of the matters asserted
• confirming the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment to the defendants and holding that phone conversations between the plaintiff and two individuals claiming to be agents of the defendants were inadmissible hearsay

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).