Kathryn E. Vertigan · November 2007
76 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 172 (2007)
First, this Note examines the general problem of parallel litigation and the particular problem of parallel litigation involving international rather than interstate lawsuits. Whereas parallel litigation between two U.S. states implicates federalism and the Full Faith and Credit Clause, the primary concern for courts dealing with international parallel litigation should be international comity. This Note therefore examines what international comity is and why it should be the primary consideration for courts deciding whether to issue a foreign antisuit injunction. Next, this Note briefly discusses what options are generally available to a court confronted with international parallel litigation, one of which is to issue an antisuit injunction.
This Note directs the bulk of its analysis toward examining the circuit split that has developed with respect to what standard courts should apply when deciding whether to issue a foreign antisuit injunction. This Note discusses each of the competing approaches and several proposals for resolving the split. Next, this Note analyzes the positive and negative aspects of each of the two competing approaches.
Finally, this Note proposes a solution, drawing upon the approach followed by courts when dealing with the act of state doctrine. Accordingly, this Note gives a basic overview of the act of state doctrine before applying some of its principles to the issue of foreign antisuit injunctions. The ultimate solution advocates for the cooperation of the judicial branch with the Executive in the adoption of a flexible framework. This framework leaves room to deal with the exigencies and delicacies required by international diplomacy while maintaining due respect for the Executive’s foreign relations prerogative.
