Recognition & Enforcement under American Law - Chapter 5.3 - Transnational Litigation and Commercial Arbitration - 3rd Edition
Joseph Lookofsky is Professor of Private and Commercial Law at the University of Copenhagen. He received his B.A. in Economics from Lehigh University, his J.D. from the New York University School of Law, and was admitted to the New York State Bar in 1971. He received his Danish law degrees (cand.jur. and dr.jur.) from the University of Copenhagen and joined the Law Faculty there in 1982. Professor Lookofsky has lectured on the CISG and other international commercial law topics for the Danish Bar Association (Advokatsamfund), the Duke University Law School in North Carolina, the University of Bologna (Facoltá di Giurisprudenza), the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg (Institut für Ausländisches und Internationales Privatrecht), and the Cornell-Paris I (Sorbonne) Summer Institute of International & Comparative Law. He is also Secretary General of the Danish Committee for Comparative Law (Association Internationale des Sciences Juridiques.
Ketilbjorn Hertz is Senior Consultant with the Danish Ministry of Justice, which he joined in 1997, and in that capacity he has participated in the drafting of important legislation, including the Bill, which led to the adoption of the Danish Arbitration Act 2005 He received degrees from the University of Copenhagen, B.A. in law in 1991, cand.jur. in 1993, B.A. in French in 1998, and Ph.D. in law in 1998.
5.3. RECOGNITION & ENFORCEMENT UNDER AMERICAN LAW
5.3.1. Recognition and Enforcement of Sister-State Judgments
A judgment rendered in an American State other than the (American) State where recognition or enforcement is sought is referred to as a “sister-State” judgment, whereas a judgment rendered outside U.S. territorial limits is referred to in the United States as a “foreign” or “foreign country” judgment.1
Focusing first on sister-State judgments, Article IV of the U.S. Constitution provides a key limitation on the rules of State law otherwise applicable to the issue of recognition and enforcement:
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and Judicial Proceedings of every other State.
Just as Title III of the Brussels I Regulation requires European Union Member State courts to recognize and enforce judgments rendered elsewhere in the European Union, the Full Faith and Credit clause generally requires each American State to extend recognition and enforcement to judgments rendered in the courts of sister-States.2
Article IV of the Constitution has been given a pro-enforcement interpretation by the U.S. Supreme Court. In addition to cases where the defendant did not receive adequate notice or an opportunity to be heard in the original action, cases where the judgment conflicts with a prior judgment entitled to recognition, and cases where the sister-State judgment was obtained by fraud, enforcement may only be denied on the basis of lack of (personal or subject-matter) jurisidiction in the judment-rendering State.3
CHAPTER 5 RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
5.3 Recognition & Enforcement under American Law5.3.1 Recognition and Enforcement of Sister-State Judgments Griffis v. Luban (2002) Notes, Questions & Commentary 5.3.2 Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Country Judgments Somportex Limited v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp. (1972) Notes, Questions & Commentary Ackermann v. Levine (1986) Notes, Questions & Commentary 5.3.3 Proposed Federal Legislation and New Federal “Speech” Statute A. American Law Institute Proposal B. New Federal Legislation: “Speech” (2010)