Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

In Re Premises Located at 840 140th Ave. Ne Case Brief

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit2011Docket #163903
634 F.3d 557 International Law Federal Courts Civil Procedure Constitutional Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A U.S. court enforced a subpoena requested by Russia under a treaty, finding the treaty eliminated the court’s usual statutory discretion to deny such requests. The court held that enforcement was mandatory unless it violated fundamental U.S. constitutional principles.

Legal Significance: This case establishes that a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) supersedes the discretionary authority of U.S. courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1782, compelling judicial assistance unless enforcement would violate the U.S. Constitution.

In Re Premises Located at 840 140th Ave. Ne Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Pursuant to the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) between the United States and Russia, the Russian government requested U.S. assistance in its criminal investigation of Arkadi Gontmakher, a U.S. citizen. The request sought business documents from Global Fishing, Inc., a U.S. company of which Gontmakher was president. The U.S. government, acting under the authority of the MLAT and 28 U.S.C. § 1782, obtained a subpoena from a federal district court compelling Global Fishing to produce the documents. Global Fishing and Gontmakher moved for a protective order to quash the subpoena, arguing that the Russian criminal proceeding was corrupt and illegal. They contended the district court should exercise its broad discretion under § 1782 to deny the request. The U.S. government countered that the MLAT, as a later-in-time self-executing treaty, superseded the discretionary aspects of § 1782, making enforcement obligatory. The district court denied the protective order, holding that the MLAT removed its discretion under § 1782 but that the subpoena must still satisfy constitutional standards, which it did.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a bilateral Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) supersede a district court’s statutory discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to deny a foreign government’s request for evidence?

Yes. The court affirmed the denial of the protective order. The US-Russia Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temp

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a bilateral Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) supersede a district court’s statutory discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to deny a foreign government’s request for evidence?

Conclusion

This decision clarifies that MLATs create a strong, near-mandatory obligation for U.S. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ul

Legal Rule

A later-in-time, self-executing Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) utilizes the procedural framework Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate

Legal Analysis

The court determined that while the MLAT's text was not plain regarding Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) supersedes the broad judicial discretion
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occ

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More