Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. District Court
Citation: 482 U.S. 522 (1987)
Facts
French aircraft manufacturers (Aerospatiale) were defendants in U.S. tort litigation arising from a plane crash. The plaintiffs sought discovery through the normal Federal Rules procedures. Aerospatiale argued that the Hague Evidence Convention provided the exclusive means for obtaining evidence from foreign parties, and that plaintiffs must first proceed through the Convention’s letter-rogatory procedures before using Federal Rules discovery.
Issue
Is the Hague Evidence Convention the exclusive channel for discovery from foreign parties in U.S. litigation, displacing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure?
Holding
No. The Supreme Court held that the Hague Evidence Convention is not mandatory or exclusive. U.S. courts may use the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to obtain evidence from foreign parties, and courts should employ a case-by-case comity analysis to decide when to use Convention procedures.
Rule
When seeking evidence from a foreign party, U.S. courts are not required to first resort to the Hague Evidence Convention. Courts apply a comity-based balancing analysis, considering the importance of the information, the specificity of the request, whether the information originates in the U.S., and the likelihood of hardship to the foreign party, among other factors.
Significance
Aerospatiale preserves broad U.S. discovery authority in international litigation and is a foundational case in transnational procedure. It shapes how U.S. litigants and courts approach cross-border discovery and reflects the tension between aggressive American discovery and foreign resistance.