New York International Law Review

  • Most Recent Issue and Archive
  • About This Publication

    The New York International Law Review features peer-written substantive articles relating to the practice of international law on such topics as NAFTA, terrorist financing restrictions, the collection of money judgments outside the U.S., foreign direct investments, and trade agreements. Edited by Lester Nelson, Esq., with the assistance of St. John's University School of Law, the New York International Law Review is published twice per year by the International Section and distributed to Section Members free of charge.

    The New York International Law Review is published as a benefit for members of the International Section and is copyrighted by the New York State Bar Association. The copying, reselling, duplication, transferring, reproducing, reusing, retaining or reprinting of this publication is strictly prohibited without permission.
    © New York State Bar Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1050-9453 (print) ISSN 1933-849X (online)

    Reprint Permission

    Article Submission

    Disability Accommodations

  • Table of Contents Current Issue

    Winter 2016

    Recent Decisions

    Arial Technologies, LLC v. Aerophile S.A.
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D. of N.Y. granted both French manufacturer defendants’ motions because plaintiffs failed to rebut the presumptive enforceability of the forum-selection clause in contract with first defendant; and the court did not have in personam jurisdiction.

    Balintulo v. Ford Motor Co.
    The U.S. Ct. of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. held Plaintiffs, who were victims of South African apartheid, had failed to allege sufficient conduct to establish that co-Defendant automobile and software manufacturer were guilty of aiding and abetting any violations of customary international law.

    Eastman Kodak Co. v. Asia Optical Co., Inc.
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D. of N.Y. held that the anti-suit injunction requested by Plaintiff was appropriate against Defendant pursuant to the test set out in China Trade for determining when an anti-suit injunction is appropriate.

    F. TV Ltd. v. Bell Media Inc.
    The F. Dist. Ct. for the S.D. of N.Y. held that there was sufficient evidence to support Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims based on a lack of jurisdiction. The court determined that there were no strong enough ties between defendant, Bell Media, Inc., a Canadian corporation, and the State of N.Y.

    In re the Matter of D.A.
    The U.S.D.C. for the E.D. of N.Y. held that Respondent was not required to return her minor son, D.A., to Greece based upon the court’s finding that the age and maturity exception of Art. 13 of the Hague Child Abductio Convention was satisfied by D.A.’s mature demeanor and his reasoning for remaining in the U.S.

    Mees v. Buiter
    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. held that the U.S.D.C. for the S.D. of N.Y. erred in its decision not to grant appellant, a Netherlands corporation, application to compel discovery to bring suit against appellee, because appellant is not required to show that discovery would be necessary for success or in commencing foreign litigation to satisfy the statute’s “for use” requirement.

    Moreno v. Basilio Pena 
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D. of N.Y. denied petition brought by the Plaintiff for the return of her child to the Dominican Republic pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Chil Abduction. The court held that Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case that her child had been wrongfully removed in the U.S. by Defendant.

    NS United Kaiun Kaisha, Ltd. v. Cogent Fibre Inc.
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D. of N.Y. granted Plaintiff, a Japanese corporation, petition for a confirmation of an arbitration award and denied the defendant’s cross motion to vacate the award because the arbitration panel was correct in finding that mitigation efforts were reasonable, did not overstep its boundaries by awarding attorney’s fees.

    O.Y. v. A.G.
    The N.Y.S. Sup. Ct. for Westchester Co. held that a marital agreement executed in Egypt in accordance with Islamic law was unenforceable because the defendant provided insufficient evidence as to the agreement validity. The Court further held that as a matter of law a postnuptial agreement is a settlement agreement, not an opt-out agreement.

    Vringo, Inc. v. ZTE Corporation
    A preliminary injunction was sought to prevent defendant Chinese corporation from using confidential information, which was protected by a non-disclosure agreement, in pending antitrust and patent litigation. The U.S.D.C. for the S.D. of N.Y. held that a preliminary injunction was reasonable against defendant corporation.