New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
Commercial Litigation and Arbitration
« Back to Complex Lit Blog

United Nations and Foreign Public Records as Falling within Fed.R.Evid. 803(8) and 902(5) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 44(a)(2)

Download PDF

The hearsay exception of Rule 803(8) includes public records kept by the United Nations and foreign governments. U.S. v. Pluta, 176 F.3d 43, 49 (2d Cir. 1999) (“Public records and reports of foreign governments . . . are within scope of Rule 803(8).”) (citation and quotation omitted); Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., 505 F.Supp. 1125, 1187-88 (E.D. Pa. 1980) (admitting United Nations report and holding that the UN qualifies as a public office or agency within the meaning of 803(8) because “the background of [its] creation, the breadth and regularity of [its] public business, and the solemnity of [its] duties, . . . [is] consistent with the theory and raison d'etre of 803(8) -- the notion that circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness are provided by the presumption that governmental reports are reliable or probably reliable.”), rev'd in part on other grounds sub nom. In re Japanese Elec. Prods. Antitrust Litig., 723 F.2d 238 (3d Cir. 1983), rev'd on other grounds, 475 U.S. 574 (1986); 4 Stephen A. Saltzburg, Michael M. Martin & Daniel J. Capra, Federal Rules of Evidence Manual 803-218-19 (9th ed. 2006); In re Korean Air Lines Disaster of Sept. 1, 1983, 932 F.2d 1475 (D.C. Cir. 1991); U. S. v. M'Biye, 655 F.2d 1240, 1242 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (construing Rule 803(10), and holding that “[i]t would defy reason to suppose that such an organization [the United Nations], constituted of public entities of the highest political order, would not itself be a public agency”).

United Nations and foreign government reports are also self-authenticating under Fed. R. Evid. 902(5) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 44(a)(2). M'Biye, 655 F.2d at 1242 (“It would defy reason to suppose that such an organization [as the U.N.], constituted of public entities of the highest political order, would not itself be a public agency” capable of making an official publication”); Constr. Drilling, Inc. v. Chusid, 63 F. Supp. 2d 509, 515 (D. N.J. 1999) (finding a foreign judicial order to be an “official publication sufficient to satisfy Fed.R.Civ.P. 44(a)(2)” and explaining that “a document that, on its face, appears to be an official publication, is admissible, unless a party opposing its admission shows that it lacks the character.”). The language of Fed. R. Civ. P. 44(a)(2)(A)(i) explicitly includes official publications of foreign records.

Share this article:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email

Recent Posts

Inherent Power Sanctions — Dismissal for Threatening Defendant and Magistrate Judge — No First Amendment Right to Threaten Violence

RICO: Domestic Injury — Delivery of Fraudulently Non-Conforming Goods FOB Los Angeles for Shipment to China Means Injury Arose Domestically When Purchaser Took Title —Other Relevant Factors Include That The Non-Conforming Goods Were Sourced and Made in the U.S. and The Racketeering Activity (Mail/Wire Fraud) Occurred in, and Was Directed from, the United States — Irrelevant to Domestic Injury Inquiry Whether Property Is Tangible or Intangible — 7th Circuit’s “Injury-Felt” Test of Domestic Injury Rejected by Supreme Court — RICO Standing Requires Concrete Financial Loss, Not Merely Injury to Valuable Intangible Property Interest (9th Circuit)

RICO Causation: Parents of Children with Disabilities Deprived In-Person Education and Services during the Pandemic Were Not Causally Injured by Teachers’ False Assurances to Federal Authorities That IDEA-Complaint Policies Were in Place, Which Caused Funds to Issue But Not to the Benefit of the Disabled Children — Damages Too Indirect — Proper Plaintiff Is U.S. Government — Private Injunctive Relief Under RICO Uncertain in Third Circuit

Sanctions: Rule 37(b)(2) Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors

Inherent Power Sanctions — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Sanctions Power Extends to Conduct Intended to Sabotage Court’s Ability to Adjudicate the Case Before It, Here, By Commencing State Court Actions Seeking to Enjoin the Federal Plaintiffs from Proceeding with Their Federal Litigation — Sanctions Fee Awards: The Factors Used For Calculating A Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Do Not Govern — Under Goodyear, the Relevant Inquiry Is Whether There Is A Sufficient Causal Link Between The Sanctioned Misconduct And The Fees Awarded

RICO: Members of Association-in-Fact Enterprise Must Act with a Common Purpose—Mere Allegation That Various Defendants Agreed at Different Times to Engage in Various Fraudulent Schemes Does Not Plausibly Support the Essential Inference, That They Acted with s Sufficiently Common Purpose

RICO Causation: (1) State’s Misrepresentation to Federal Government That It Was Providing Plaintiffs with Mandated Special Education Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Injury Because The Failure to Provide The Education Was Not Caused by the Fraud on the Federal Government — (2) The Three Factors for Assessing RICO Causation — (3) Limits of the Second Circuit’s Decision in Alix v. McKinsey That Causation Can Be Established Where A Fraud On The Judiciary “Or Other Governmental Entity” Resulted In A Resource Going To Someone Less Deserving

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

Archives
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

New York Office

© 2024 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice