John Fellas

January 21, 2010 | New York Law Journal

John Fellas, a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed, writes that while both Comer v. Murphy Oil USA and Connecticut v. Am. Elec. Power Co. concern claims by U.S. plaintiffs against U.S. defendants for damages suffered in the United States, nothing in the logic of these decisions would limit their holdings to domestic victims, actors or territory. Greenhouse gas emissions generated in one country flow across national boundaries with ease and mix with the greenhouse gas emissions generated by other actors in other countries, and their impact - rising temperatures and sea levels and the resulting harm - could be felt anywhere. The result may be a wave of international climate change litigation in the U.S. courts.

By John Fellas

14 minute read

August 18, 2004 | New York Law Journal

John Fellas, a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed, covers a U.S. Supreme Court decision interpreting a statute authorizing federal courts to assist in the taking of evidence for use in foreign proceedings.

By John Fellas

11 minute read

May 13, 2004 | New York Law Journal

John Fellas, a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed, explains how the choice of forum in international litigation can be of great significance. It can affect, for example, whether the case is resolved by a judge or a jury, whether punitive damages are available, whether a class action lawsuit can be maintained, whether lawyers can act on a contingency fee basis, or whether attorney's fees and costs are recoverable.

By John Fellas

11 minute read