In re Application of Antonio del Valle Ruiz
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
939 F.3d 520 (2019)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Banco Popular Español (BPE), formerly Spain’s sixth-largest bank, failed. Before the failure, Banco Santander S.A. (Santander) (defendant) conducted extensive due-diligence research into BPE in preparation for a buyout offer. After the failure, the Spanish government conducted a forced sale and, because Santander was the only bidder, sold BPE to Santander for €1. A group of Mexican investors, led by Antonio del Valle Ruiz, and a group of United States investment-management firms (collectively, the BPE investors) suffered significant losses because of the government-forced sale. The BPE investors sued Santander and Santander’s New York-based subsidiary, Santander Investment Securities, Inc. (SIS), in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The BPE investors filed a 28 U.S.C. § 1782 application for discovery production of all documents related to Santander’s due-diligence investigations into BPE, most of which were extraterritorial, meaning located outside of the United States. Santander and SIS challenged, arguing that (1) because Santander had not been served with process in New York, the district court did not have personal jurisdiction over Santander and § 1782 did not apply, and (2) § 1782 did not allow the district court to demand production of extraterritorial documents. The district court held that it had personal jurisdiction over SIS but not Santander and that § 1782 allowed the court to demand production of SIS’s extraterritorial documents. SIS and Santander appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hall, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.