In this article, Mr. Kadish discusses the comity analysis of Timberlane Lumber Company v. Bank of America, and examines what it involves, what it accomplishes, whether it is justified, and whether there are preferable alternatives to it. He concludes that the Timberlane analysis should rejected, or at least limited becauses its use to determine United States' court jurisdiction is at best questionable, because it violates traditional abstention doctrine and current Supreme Court and Congressional treatment of foreigners' activities, because there may be insurmountable practical difficulties in applying the analysis, and because the analysis encourages courts to enter the political arena.
Steven A. Kadish,
Comity and the International Application of the Sherman Act: Encouraging the Courts to Enter the Political Arena,
Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus.