Gorsoan Ltd. v. Sundlun

Gorsoan Ltd. v. Sundlun

Opinion

 [*353]  SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the opinion and order of the district court is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED for the district court to quash the subpoenas in question and dismiss the petition.

By order entered October 16, 2018, the district court (Sullivan, J.) granted the ex parte application of petitioner-appellee Gorsoan Limited ("Gorsoan") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to obtain discovery for use in a proceeding [**2]  in Cyprus. Thereafter, Gorsoan moved to compel respondents-appellants Stuart Sundlun, Zoe Bullock Remmel, Eugenia Bullock, and Zoya Kuznetsova (collectively, "Respondents") to comply with its subpoenas, and intervenor-appellant Janna Bullock ("Bullock") moved to vacate the ex parte order and quash the subpoenas. In an opinion and order entered January 24, 2020, the district court (Abrams, J.) granted Gorsoan's motion and denied Bullock's motion. Bullock and Respondents appeal. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

In the Cyprus action, Gorsoan and Gazprombank OJSC ("Gazprombank"), a Russian bank, allege that, between 2005 and 2007, Bullock; her husband, a former Russian official; and other parties defrauded investors in municipal bonds, resulting in approximately $25 million in damages. The court in Cyprus ordered that assets exceeding 10,000 Euros anywhere in the world belonging to Bullock (and other defendants) be frozen and that Bullock (and the other defendants) disclose those assets. The asset-freezing order became final in March 2013.

In 2013, the district court granted an application of Gazprombank [**3]  and Gorsoan for discovery from Bullock pursuant to § 1782.¹ Bullock produced several thousand documents and sat for two depositions, during the first of which she claimed to have no assets or bank accounts and to be completely dependent on her daughters and mother for all financial support, including cash disbursements. Gorsoan complained to the district court that these responses were patently incredible, and the district court (Sullivan, J.) held Bullock in contempt.² In the second deposition, Bullock invoked her Fifth Amendment right and declined to provide an answer to almost every question posed by Gorsoan and Gazprombank. In September 2018, Gorsoan filed the instant application pursuant to § 1782, seeking asset discovery  [*354]  from Bullock's two daughters, her mother, and Sundlun, who has acted as a trustee for the trusts for Bullock's children. Now acting as an intervenor, Bullock opposed the application. As noted above, the district court granted the application, and this appeal followed.

] "[W]e review de novo the district court's determination as to whether the statutory requirements [**4]  of § 1782 are met, and if we are satisfied that these requirements are met, we review the district court's decision on whether to grant discovery for abuse of discretion." Euromepa, S.A. v. R. Esmerian, Inc., 154 F.3d 24, 27 (2d Cir. 1998). A party seeking to invoke § 1782 must show:

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.