Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. United States District Court
United States Supreme Court
482 U.S. 522 (1987)
- Written by Shelby Crawford, JD
Facts
Following a plane crash in Iowa, several Americans (plaintiffs) sued the plane’s manufacturers, Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale and Société de Construction d’Avions de Tourisme (collectively, the manufacturers) (defendants). Both manufacturers were French corporations. The lawsuit was filed in federal district court. The Americans sought discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), which included requests for information and documents that were located in France. The manufacturers filed a motion for a protective order from the discovery. The United States and France were two of 17 countries that had signed the Hague Evidence Convention (the convention), which provided procedures for the signatory countries to obtain discovery from other countries that had signed the convention. The manufacturers argued that: (1) the convention’s procedures must be used to request any discovery that was located in France and (2) even if not, the Americans were required to use the procedures before resorting to discovery under the FRCP. The district court denied the protective-order motion. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the denial but ruled that the convention applied only to discovery requests made to nonparties, not requests made to the parties in a lawsuit. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Blackmun, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.
