The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sweet, District Judge.
Plaintiff Diego Herbstein ("Herbstein"), a medical doctor, is
a citizen of Argentina but currently a permanent United States
resident domiciled in the State of New York. Herbstein is an
officer, director, and 50% shareholder in Imagenes Por
Computacion ("IxC"). He is also listed as a director and 8%
shareholder of Altec-2.
Altec-2 is an Argentine corporation with its headquarters in
Buenos Aires, Argentina engaged in the development of
diagnostic centers in Argentina and other countries in South
Defendant Martin Bruetman ("Bruetman"), a medical doctor, is
a citizen and a resident of Illinois. He is a member of the
board of directors of Altec-2. He is president and chief
executive officer of IxC and also serves as chairman of its
board of directors.
Defendant High Tech Medical Parks Development Corp. ("High
Tech") is an Illinois corporation with its principal place of
business in Illinois. High Tech specializes in the scientific
and technical advising of medical establishments. It also owns
49% of Altec stock.
Defendant Ronald Tash ("Tash") is a citizen of Illinois and
is a 12.25% shareholder in High Tech. Tash also serves as
secretary and legal counsel for High Tech.
Defendant Douglas Kiell is a citizen of Connecticut, and at
all relevant times, owned 12.25% of High Tech stock. Until
January 1989, he was the president and chief financial officer
of High Tech.
The defendants are referred to collectively as the "Bruetman
In 1989, Herbstein initiated a civil suit in Argentina
against Bruetman and Amerigo Pescio ("Pescio"). At
approximately the same time, Bruetman brought a suit on behalf
of himself and IxC, requesting an investigation of several
people, including Herbstein. The proceedings in the above
action are set forth in this court's opinion of July 11, 1990
On October 16, 1989, Herbstein filed his complaint in the
Southern District of New York seeking damages for fraud
racketeering, conversion, and breach of fiduciary duty. On
January 17, 1990, the Bruetman Defendants filed a motion to
dismiss Herbstein's case on the grounds of comity or forum non
conveniens, or alternatively, to stay the case until the
resolution of the proceedings in Argentina. The Opinion of July
11, 1990 denied the motion.
In an order of October 30, 1990, the court dismissed the
action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. On November
1, 1990, the court issued an order ...