Republic of Kazakhstan v. Biedermann International

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing “that arbitration’s principal advantages may be destroyed if the parties succumb to fighting over burdensome discovery requests far from the place of arbitration.”
• recognizing “that arbitration’s principal advantages may be destroyed if the parties succumb to fighting over burdensome discovery requests far from the place of arbitration.”
• agreeing with the Second Circuit that the phrase “‘foreign or international tribunal’ is ambiguous” and relying on the history and apparent purpose of the statute to determine the meaning of that phrase
• noting, in concluding that § 1782 does not apply to private international arbitrations, that \[r]esort to § 1782 in the teeth of such [arbitration] agreements suggests a party's attempt to manipulate United States court processes for tactical advantage\
• “References in the United States Code to ‘arbitral tribunals’ almost uniformly concern an adjunct of a foreign government or international agency.”
• proceeding before Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).