Fuhr v. Credit Suisse AG

Tim Fuhr (plaintiff) claimed to be the heir to the Bäuml family fortune. Fuhr’s search for the assets of the last Bäuml, Dr. Ambrosius Bäuml, led Fuhr to an account with Credit Suisse AG (defendant) that Fuhr believed belonged to Bäuml. Credit Suisse initially cooperated with Fuhr but stopped cooperating when it concluded that the account was not Bäuml’s. In the course of his asset search, Fuhr alleged that Luis Marimón Garnier wrongfully diverted money from Bäuml’s Credit Suisse account. Marimón (and his son and law firm) responded by suing Fuhr for defamation. In aid of his defense to that suit, Fuhr sought discovery from Credit Suisse pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 regarding an allegedly Bäuml-owned Credit Suisse account. Section 1782 authorized discovery for use in a foreign or international tribunal. The district court permitted Fuhr to serve a subpoena on Credit Suisse, which Credit Suisse moved to quash. The district court denied Credit Suisse’s motion, ruling that enforcing the subpoena would not circumvent Swiss banking-privacy law or expose Credit Suisse to criminal liability in Switzerland because Bäuml owned a Credit Suisse account and Fuhr was Bäuml’s heir. In doing so, the district court relied on Credit Suisse communications that appeared to acknowledge that Bäuml owned a Credit Suisse account. Credit Suisse responded that although it initially believed that Bäuml owned a Credit Suisse account, it later concluded that Bäuml did not. The district court rejected Credit Suisse’s explanation on the ground that the explanation conflicted with Credit Suisse’s statement to Fuhr that it found no banking relationship between Bäuml and Credit Suisse. Credit Suisse appealed, arguing that the district court abused its discretion.