• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


International Arbitration and Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. Section 1782

0
by Beth Graham

Wednesday, May 08, 2013


Tweet

S.I. Strong, Associate Professor of Law and Senior Fellow, Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution at the University of Missouri recently authored, Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. §1782: Distinguishing International Commercial Arbitration and International Investment Arbitration, 1 Stanford Journal of Complex Litigation (2013), Forthcoming; University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2013-10.  In her article, Professor Strong discusses the changing role of discovery requests pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1782 in international arbitration disputes.

Here is the abstract:

For many years, courts, commentators and counsel agreed that 28 U.S.C. §1782 – a somewhat extraordinary procedural device that allows U.S. courts to order discovery in the United States “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” – did not apply to disputes involving international arbitration. However, that presumption has come under challenge in recent years, particularly in the realm of investment arbitration, where the Chevron-Ecuador dispute has made Section 1782 requests a commonplace procedure. This Article takes a rigorous look at both the history and the future of Section 1782 in international arbitration, taking care to distinguish between requests made in the context of international commercial arbitration and requests made in the context of international investment arbitration. In so doing, the Article considers issues relating to grants of jurisdiction, state interests and standard interpretive canons.

This and other scholarly articles written by Professor Strong may be downloaded from the Social Science Research Network.

Related Posts

  • Beyond International Commercial Arbitration? the Promise of International Commercial MediationBeyond International Commercial Arbitration? the Promise of International Commercial Mediation
  • Arbitration of Internal Trust Disputes: The Next Frontier for International Commercial Arbitration?Arbitration of Internal Trust Disputes: The Next Frontier for International Commercial Arbitration?
  • Applying the Lessons of International Commercial Arbitration to International Commercial Mediation: A Dispute System Design AnalysisApplying the Lessons of International Commercial Arbitration to International Commercial Mediation: A Dispute System Design Analysis
  • Anti-Suit Injunctions in Judicial and Arbitral Procedures in the United StatesAnti-Suit Injunctions in Judicial and Arbitral Procedures in the United States
  • Realizing Rationality: An Empirical Assessment of International Commercial MediationRealizing Rationality: An Empirical Assessment of International Commercial Mediation
  • Use and Perception of International Commercial Mediation and Conciliation: An Empirical StudyUse and Perception of International Commercial Mediation and Conciliation: An Empirical Study

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy