This month we address cases concerning the appropriate standard for finding that a litigant has perpetrated a fraud on the court, a court’s authority to dismiss on the basis of forum non conveniens absent a formal motion to do so, and a driving-under-the-influence suspect’s right to communicate with counsel prior to submitting to a chemical breath test.
Fraud on the Court
In CDR Creances S.A.S. v. Cohen, the court determined the appropriate standard for finding that a litigant has perpetrated a fraud on the court. The court, in a unanimous decision by Judge Jenny Rivera,1 adopted the approach taken in federal cases and ruled that a court must find by clear and convincing evidence that a party engaged in a fraud on the court before imposing appropriate sanctions.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
