FEDERAL · 28 U.S.C. · Chapter 117
Transmittal of letter rogatory or request
28 U.S.C. § 1781
Title28 — Judiciary and Judicial Procedure
Chapter117 — EVIDENCE; DEPOSITIONS
This text of 28 U.S.C. § 1781 (Transmittal of letter rogatory or request) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
28 U.S.C. § 1781.
Text
(a)The Department of State has power, directly, or through suitable channels—
(1)to receive a letter rogatory issued, or request made, by a foreign or international tribunal, to transmit it to the tribunal, officer, or agency in the United States to whom it is addressed, and to receive and return it after execution; and
(2)to receive a letter rogatory issued, or request made, by a tribunal in the United States, to transmit it to the foreign or international tribunal, officer, or agency to whom it is addressed, and to receive and return it after execution.
(b)This section does not preclude—
(1)the transmittal of a letter rogatory or request directly from a foreign or international tribunal to the tribunal, officer, or agency in the United States to whom it is addressed and its return i
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
United Kingdom v. United States
238 F.3d 1312 (Eleventh Circuit, 2001)
United States v. Robert M. Sensi
879 F.2d 888 (D.C. Circuit, 1989)
The Society of Lloyd's v. James Frederick Ashenden
233 F.3d 473 (Seventh Circuit, 2000)
Jaime J. Merino v. United States Marshal
326 F.2d 5 (Ninth Circuit, 1964)
United States v. Howard D. Reagan
453 F.2d 165 (Sixth Circuit, 1971)
Stephen M. Flatow, Bank Saderat Iran, Claimant-Appellee v. The Islamic Republic of Iran
308 F.3d 1065 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
United States v. Rosen
240 F.R.D. 204 (E.D. Virginia, 2007)
In Re Letter Rogatory From the Justice Court, District of Montreal, Canada. Appeal of John Fecarotta
523 F.2d 562 (Sixth Circuit, 1975)
Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. v. Schrapper
774 A.2d 264 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 2001)
In re Automotive Refinishing Paint Antitrust Litigation
229 F.R.D. 482 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2005)
United States v. Cannistraro
800 F. Supp. 30 (D. New Jersey, 1992)
Lasky v. Continental Products Corp.
569 F. Supp. 1227 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1983)
Bodner v. Paribas
202 F.R.D. 370 (E.D. New York, 2000)
United States v. Alfred D. Kincaid, United States of America v. Albert J. Greene, United States of America v. Kelley Twomey
712 F.2d 1 (First Circuit, 1983)
B & L Drilling Electronics v. Totco
87 F.R.D. 543 (W.D. Oklahoma, 1978)
In Re Letters Rogatory From the City of Haugesund, Norway, Harvey D. Emett
497 F.2d 378 (Ninth Circuit, 1974)
Tjontveit v. Den Norske Bank ASA
997 F. Supp. 799 (S.D. Texas, 1998)
Ramirez v. Lagunes
794 S.W.2d 501 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Olin Corp. v. FISONS PLC
47 F. Supp. 2d 151 (D. Massachusetts, 1999)
SLIGHT BY AND THROUGH SLIGHT v. EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co.
979 F. Supp. 433 (S.D. West Virginia, 1997)
Source Credit
History
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 948; Pub. L. 88–619, §8(a), Oct. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 996.)
Editorial Notes
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §653 (R.S. §875; Feb. 27, 1877, ch. 69, §1, 19 Stat. 241; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167).
Word "officer" was substituted for "commissioner" to obviate uncertainty as to the person to whom the letters or commissioned may be issued.
The third sentence of section 653 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., providing for admission of testimony "so taken and returned" without objection as to the method of return, was omitted as unnecessary. Obviously, if the method designated by Congress is followed, it cannot be objected to.
The last sentence of section 653 of title 26, U.S.C., 1940 ed., relating to letters rogatory from courts of foreign countries, is incorporated in section 1782 of this title.
The revised section extends the provisions of section 653 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., which applied only to cases wherein the United States was a party or was interested, so as to insure a uniform method of taking foreign depositions in all cases.
Words "courts of the United States" were inserted to make certain that the section is addressed to the Federal rather than the State courts as obviously intended by Congress.
Changes were made in phraseology.
Editorial Notes
Amendments
1964—Pub. L. 88–619 substituted provisions authorizing the Department of State to transmit a letter rogatory or request by a foreign or international tribunal, or by a tribunal in the United States, to the tribunal, officer or agency in the United States or its foreign or international counterpart, to whom addressed, and to return it after execution, and providing that this section does not preclude direct transmission of letters rogatory or requests between interested tribunals, officers or agencies of foreign, international and of United States origin, for provisions authorizing United States ministers or consuls, whenever a United States court issues letters rogatory or a commission to take a deposition, to receive the executed letters or commissions from foreign courts or officers, endorse them with the place and date of receipt and any change in the deposition, and transmit it to the clerk of the issuing court in the same manner as his official dispatches, in text and "Transmittal of letter rogatory or request" for "Foreign witnesses" in section catchline.
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §653 (R.S. §875; Feb. 27, 1877, ch. 69, §1, 19 Stat. 241; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167).
Word "officer" was substituted for "commissioner" to obviate uncertainty as to the person to whom the letters or commissioned may be issued.
The third sentence of section 653 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., providing for admission of testimony "so taken and returned" without objection as to the method of return, was omitted as unnecessary. Obviously, if the method designated by Congress is followed, it cannot be objected to.
The last sentence of section 653 of title 26, U.S.C., 1940 ed., relating to letters rogatory from courts of foreign countries, is incorporated in section 1782 of this title.
The revised section extends the provisions of section 653 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., which applied only to cases wherein the United States was a party or was interested, so as to insure a uniform method of taking foreign depositions in all cases.
Words "courts of the United States" were inserted to make certain that the section is addressed to the Federal rather than the State courts as obviously intended by Congress.
Changes were made in phraseology.
Editorial Notes
Amendments
1964—Pub. L. 88–619 substituted provisions authorizing the Department of State to transmit a letter rogatory or request by a foreign or international tribunal, or by a tribunal in the United States, to the tribunal, officer or agency in the United States or its foreign or international counterpart, to whom addressed, and to return it after execution, and providing that this section does not preclude direct transmission of letters rogatory or requests between interested tribunals, officers or agencies of foreign, international and of United States origin, for provisions authorizing United States ministers or consuls, whenever a United States court issues letters rogatory or a commission to take a deposition, to receive the executed letters or commissions from foreign courts or officers, endorse them with the place and date of receipt and any change in the deposition, and transmit it to the clerk of the issuing court in the same manner as his official dispatches, in text and "Transmittal of letter rogatory or request" for "Foreign witnesses" in section catchline.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
28 U.S.C. § 1781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/28/1781.