In Re: Patricio Clerici

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, although Clerici was a party (indeed, the plaintiff) in a Panamanian proceeding, § 1782 assistance was justified because Clerici had left Panama and the Panamanian Court was unable to enforce its own order to produce information
• instructing courts to undertake a circumvention analysis before granting a § 1782 application
• “The Supreme Court in Intel added that ‘unduly intrusive or burdensome requests may be rejected or trimmed.’” (quotation omitted)
• \Rule 69(a) provides the process by which a judgment creditor can enforce a money judgment and authorizes post-judgment discovery in aid of execution of that judgment.\
• “Rule 69(a) itself does not prescribe a practice and procedure for gathering evidence, but gives the judgment creditor the choice of federal or state discovery rules.”
• “[Rule 69] authorizes a judgment creditor to obtain post-judgment discovery from any person using all the discovery devices provided in the Federal Rules or by state practice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).