Interesting story involving Chevron in Equador and potential remedies you may have as a defense attorney to combat U.S. plaintiff's attorneys partaking in "sharp" practice in foreign, corrupt judicial systems. This case appears to be similar to that of Dole in Nicarugua.
The defense attorneys for Chevron in this case had an alien tort claim removed from U.S. courts on forum non conveniens grounds. The U.S. plaintiff's attorneys then sought an astronomical amount of damages in Equadorian court. Chevron's attorneys sought to discredit the Latin American court by returning to U.S. courts and alleging fraud.
Chevron's attorneys were aided by an American film maker who was producing a documentary about the case. Portions of the film that were initially released to the public captured the Equadorian judge handling the case on film discussing damages with an outside party. Further footage that was ordered to be turned over by a U.S. court suggested that the "independent" damages expert appointed by the Equadorian Court was colluding with the plaintiff's attorneys in drafting his report wherein he recommended approximately $27 billion in damages.
Are these cases establishing precedent by which defendants use U.S. courts to monitor litigation in foreign courts, even after they have removed the case from U.S. courts on forum non conveniens grounds? Will cases such as these begin to alter the way U.S. courts decide applications to remove cases from U.S. courts based upon forum non conveniens?