Republic of Philippines v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
43 F.3d 65 (1994)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The Republic of the Philippines (plaintiff) sued Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse) (defendant) in federal court, asserting various claims. At trial, Pedro Padre Jr. and Jerry Orlina, Filipino Westinghouse employees, testified for Westinghouse. In addition, Westinghouse submitted an affidavit from Perfecto Fernandez, a professor at the University of the Philippines, which was owned by the Philippines. After the jury returned a verdict for Westinghouse, Westinghouse presented evidence that Philippine officials had harassed Padre, Orlina, and Fernandez due to their testimony. Westinghouse presented evidence that the government had attacked Padre and Orlina in the press and threatened to take legal actions against them, including for tax fraud. Westinghouse also presented evidence that the government commenced disciplinary actions against Fernandez at the government-owned university. Westinghouse moved for an injunction enjoining any further harassment and sought sanctions against the Philippines. The district court found that the actions of the Philippines threatened the integrity of its proceedings and the justice system. Accordingly, the court enjoined the Philippines from taking any retaliatory actions against any witness who testified or might testify in the matter. The court also directed the Philippines to renounce the retaliatory actions it had taken to date. The Philippines appealed, arguing that the order violated the principles of international comity.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lewis, 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.