Här är domen som avvisar valet av domstol:
https://casetext.com/case/carlstrom-v-livforsakring
Den enda kopplingen som VX anfør som grund till att stämma i NYC är denna, och den avvisas kontant av domstolen:
Citat:
Carlström alleges that wrongdoing of an entirely different nature occurred in New York. He asserts that in May 2019 someone attempted to enter his hotel room and a few weeks later someone tailed him. Those perpetrators have not been identified, but Carlström assumes that the defendants are responsible for that harassment because they possess the motive to harm him. Even if his assumption is correct, this frightening activity is tangential to the events at the center of this lawsuit, the commercial fraud and corruption that Carlström asserts victimized his companies in Sweden. These two New York events do not alter the fact that little or no deference is owed to Carlström's choice of New York as the forum for his claims based on the defendants' conduct in Sweden. Carlström's only other alleged tie to this jurisdiction is through Resurs Direkt's investment in the BlackRock Funds. But Resurs Direkt's injury was sustained in Sweden when a Swedish defendant refused to pay Resurs Direkt commissions on those investments.
Den andre søkaren avvisas också:
Citat:
Finally, Brune's choice of forum is entitled to minimal deference. While he is a New York resident, Brune has a very limited role in this litigation. He has no connection whatsoever to the bulk of the alleged Swedish financial wrongdoing and corruption.
Argumentationen är att Brune skulle ha jobbat med VX om inte den anførda brottsligheten redan inträffat. Den var inte domaren enig i var en grund før stämning.
Slutsats:
Citat:
In sum, neither Brune's peripheral involvement nor Carlström's U.S. residency alters the inescapable fact that this is essentially a dispute between foreigners about foreign commercial transactions. The plaintiffs' choice of forum is therefore entitled to little or no deference.
Istället:
Citat:
Sweden has a long-established and well-developed legal system with many procedural safeguards for the parties who appear there. Moreover, evidence submitted on this motion indicates that the plaintiffs may bring claims in Sweden for damages resulting from the alleged conspiracy to silence Carlström and to destroy his companies, the alleged hacking of his computer, the tortious interference with his contracts, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiffs do not assert that any of the defendants could evade service of process in Sweden or avoid the jurisdiction of that country's courts. Indeed, Folksam has declared that it would submit to service of process in Sweden.
Asylsøkaren får också lämna USA, så inget hindrar egentligen från att ta saken där den hør hemma.
Citat:
Plaintiffs briefly assert that Carlström cannot leave the United States because of his pending asylum application in this country. That is not true. Asylum applicants may be permitted to travel internationally after requesting Advance Parole from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Verkar som att domare Cote inte anser att VX løper någon jätterisk att bestraffas extra i sitt gamla hemland, trots at det är detta land han søker asyl från.
Så, vad är det som nu VX øverklagat/øverväger øverklaga? Det enda som beslutats är att avvisa den på grund av formalia, ingen värdering alls har gjorts av vad som anførts så det måste väl vara det?
Enklast är
såklart att ta stämningen i Sverige och det borde hans jurister, som han tydligen
betalat en halv miljard till, ha berättat før honom redan vid førsta møtet (borde vända sig till Plus och klaga på felaktig rådgivning). Såvida de inte såg en halv miljard orsaker till att inte førklara det uppenbara før honom. Mer troligt är såklart att det inte finns några utbetalade pengar utan bara en No cure - no pay som vid
full seger på alla punkter skulle kunna ha givit detta.
