A court can deny a plaintiff wife's request to permit service via mail in Brazil, because Brazil is a party to IAC, the Inter-American Convention on Letters of Rogatory. The plaintiff wife, Tiffany Yanyac, requested the court's permission to serve the defendant husband via mail at the husband's residence in Brazil, as opposed to via the procedures in the Inter-American Convention, which could take longer. Use of letters rogatory provides a "safe harbor," because a plaintiff that follows the procedures in the Inter-American Convention is more likely to enforce a judgment abroad. Courts have found that if they give effect to a foreign country's preference for use of letters rogatory to effectuate service of process "[t]he interests of both forums are advanced—the foreign [state] because its laws and policies have been vindicated; the domestic country because international cooperation and ties have been strengthened," pursuant to Tucker v. Interarms, a 1999 decision of the Northern District of Ohio. Here, the court found that the plaintiff should follow the procedures in the Inter-American Convention, because the U.S. and Brazil signed the Inter-American Convention, Brazilian law provides for service via letters rogatory, federal courts apply principles of comity and Connecticut law provides for adherence to applicable treaties and conventions. Connecticut General Statutes §52-59, wrote the court, "specifically refers to and recognizes foreign treaties and conventions in the context of service of process." Use of alternate methods of service, other than those in the Inter-American Convention, poses a risk that the plaintiff will not be capable of enforcing any judgment in Brazil.

VIEW FULL CASE