Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Application of HORNBEAM CORPORATION’s Request for Discovery Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782 Hornbeam Corporation, Bracha Foundation, Vadim Shulman, Intervenors-Appellees, v. Halliwell Assets, Inc., Panikos Symeou, Intervenors-Appellants.
IN RE: Application of Hornbeam Corporation’s Request for Discovery Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782 Hornbeam Corporation, Bracha Foundation, Vadim Shulman, Intervenors-Appellees, v. CC Metals and Alloys, LLC, Felman Productions, LLC, Felman Trading, Inc., Georgian American Alloys, Inc., Mordechai Korf, Optima Fixed Income, LLC, Optima Group, LLC, Optima International of Miami, Inc., Optima Ventures, LLC, Interested Parties-Appellants, Halliwell Assets, Inc., Panikos Symeou, Intervenors-Appellants.
Halliwell Assets, Inc. and Panikos Symeou appeal from the district court's order permitting and modifying discovery sought by Hornbeam Corp. under 28 U.S.C. § 1782. After we heard oral argument in this appeal, Hornbeam stated—in a filing submitted to a district court in New York—that it had changed its litigation strategy and now would not be instituting legal proceedings in the British Virgin Islands. See Hornbeam Corp.’s Mot. to Amend Second Am. Protective Order, D.E. 187 at 1–2, 4–5, in In re Application of Hornbeam, Corp., No. 1:14-mc-00424 (VSB) (S.D.N.Y.). The appellants moved to supplement the record with this filing, and we granted that motion without objection from Hornbeam.
We can “take judicial notice of subsequent developments in cases that are a matter of public record and are relevant to the appeal.” Rothenberg v. Sec. Mgmt. Co., Inc., 667 F.2d 958, 961 n.8 (11th Cir. 1982) (citing cases). Given Hornbeam's recent concession that legal proceedings in the British Virgin Islands will not be instituted, the discovery allowed by the district court is not for use in a foreign proceeding. See In re Clerici, 481 F.3d 1324, 1331–32 (11th Cir. 2007). We therefore vacate the § 1782 order being appealed, see D.E. 209, and remand for the district court to decide in the first instance whether the discovery already obtained should be destroyed as the appellants request.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 18-12990, No. 18-14104
Decided: January 14, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)