A cousin-to-cousin loan sounds simple—until the judgment crosses an ocean. We walk through a striking case where a Nigerian court entered a money judgment and an Arizona court recognized it, revealing how comity, reciprocity, and due process shape whether foreign creditors can collect in the United States. With commercial litigator Marshall Hunt, we unpack the Uniform Foreign Country Money Judgments Recognition Act, Arizona’s added reciprocity requirement, and the practical tests courts use to decide if a foreign judgment deserves respect.
We break down what “due process” really means in cross-border disputes: proper notice, a real chance to respond, and a court with legitimate authority over the parties. You’ll hear how service by email can satisfy legal standards, how personal jurisdiction turns on purposeful contacts and the place of the transaction, and why judgments for taxes, penalties, or family matters usually won’t be recognized. Along the way, we compare U.S. and Nigerian procedures, highlight why Arizona diverges from the modern trend, and show how Rule 44.1 lets courts consider expert affidavits to understand foreign law.
For founders, in-house counsel, and dealmakers, the stakes are real. Recognition rules influence contract drafting, venue and governing law clauses, and enforcement strategy when deals go south. Respecting competent foreign judgments saves time, reduces costs, and avoids conflicting rulings, while reciprocity helps U.S. businesses receive fair treatment abroad. If you move money, goods, or services across borders, this conversation gives you the tools to plan smarter: document contacts, choose enforceable forums, define service methods, and know the defenses that actually work.
Enjoyed the conversation? Follow the show, share it with a colleague who handles international deals, and leave a quick review to help others find us. Your questions and stories power future episodes—send them our way and join the dialogue.
