Carl Marks & Co., Inc. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before OAKES, NEWMAN and MINER; PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 841 F.2d 26 |
| Parties | CARL MARKS & CO., INC., Hubert Park Beck, and Moses K.S. Altman, individually, and on behalf of all other holders of Five Year Five and One-Half Per Cent External Gold (Dollar) Bearer Bonds issued by the Imperial Russian Government, dated |
| Decision Date | 01 December 1916 |
Page 26
Altman, individually, and on behalf of all other holders of
Five Year Five and One-Half Per Cent External Gold (Dollar)
Bearer Bonds issued by the Imperial Russian Government,
dated December 1, 1916, due December 1, 1921, similarly
situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, Defendant-Appellee.
CARL MARKS & CO., INC., Hubert Park Beck, and Moses K.S.
Altman, individually, and on behalf of all other holders of
Participation Certificates in the $50,000,000, 6 1/2 Three
Year Credit in favor of the Imperial Russian Government,
dated as of July 10, 1916, due June 18, 1919, similarly
situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, Defendant-Appellee.
Second Circuit.
Decided Feb. 29, 1988.
Edward M. Sills, New York City (Lawrence Milberg, Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Specthrie & Lerach, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs-appellants.
Eugene Theroux, Washington, D.C. (B. Thomas Peele, Baker & McKenzie, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for defendant-appellee.
Douglas Letter, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C. (Richard K. Willard, Asst. U.S. Atty. Gen., Washington D.C., Abraham D. Sofaer, Legal Advisor, Elizabeth G. Verville, Deputy Legal Advisor, U.S. Dept. of State, Washington, D.C., Rudolph
Page 27
W. Giuliani, U.S. Atty., S.D.N.Y. York City, of counsel) argued and submitted a statement of interest, for the U.S.Before OAKES, NEWMAN and MINER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiffs-appellants are class representatives of holders of debt instruments, five-year external gold dollar bearer bonds and three-year credit participation certificates, that the Russian Imperial Government issued in 1916. Interest was paid on all the certificate installments and all but five bearer bond coupons after Lenin's Bolshevik Government repudiated "[a]ll foreign loans ... unconditionally and without exception" in 1918. The instant actions were commenced under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA"), 28 U.S.C. Secs. 1330, 1602-1611 (1982), to recover the principal on both instruments and the interest represented by the five bond coupons from defendant-appellee Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ("USSR"). Default judgments were entered against appellee on March 31, 1986 in the United States District Court for the Southern...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Altmann v. Republic of Austria, No. 01-56003.
...encompass events dating back at least as far as the date of this letter. See Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 841 F.2d 26 (2d Cir.1988); Jackson v. People's Republic of China, 794 F.2d 1490 (11th Cir.1986); Slade v. United States of Mexico, 617 F.Supp. 351 We nee......
-
Abrams v. Societe Nationale Des Chemins, No. CIV.A.00-CV-5326(DGT).
...the FSIA is premised almost entirely on a 1988 Second Circuit case, Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Page 434 Republics, 841 F.2d 26 (2d Cir.1988), where plaintiffs, class representatives of holders of debt instruments issued by the Russian Imperial Government in 1916, brou......
-
Garb v. Republic of Poland, No. 99 Civ. 3487(ERK).
...to the FSIA that changed prior law cannot be applied retroactively, Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 841 F.2d 26, 27 (2d Cir.1988), it is necessary to discuss the law prior to the enactment of the FSIA and the law regarding the retroactivity of the exceptions upo......
-
Turkmani v. Republic of Bolivia, No. CIV.A.97-1563(RMU).
...of action arising between 1952 and the enactment of the FSIA in 1976. See Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 841 F.2d 26, 27 (2d Cir.1988) (finding that "only after 1952 was it reasonable for a foreign sovereign to anticipate being sued in United States courts......
-
Altmann v. Republic of Austria, No. 01-56003.
...encompass events dating back at least as far as the date of this letter. See Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 841 F.2d 26 (2d Cir.1988); Jackson v. People's Republic of China, 794 F.2d 1490 (11th Cir.1986); Slade v. United States of Mexico, 617 F.Supp. 351 We nee......
-
Abrams v. Societe Nationale Des Chemins, No. CIV.A.00-CV-5326(DGT).
...the FSIA is premised almost entirely on a 1988 Second Circuit case, Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Page 434 Republics, 841 F.2d 26 (2d Cir.1988), where plaintiffs, class representatives of holders of debt instruments issued by the Russian Imperial Government in 1916, brou......
-
Garb v. Republic of Poland, No. 99 Civ. 3487(ERK).
...to the FSIA that changed prior law cannot be applied retroactively, Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 841 F.2d 26, 27 (2d Cir.1988), it is necessary to discuss the law prior to the enactment of the FSIA and the law regarding the retroactivity of the exceptions upo......
-
Turkmani v. Republic of Bolivia, No. CIV.A.97-1563(RMU).
...of action arising between 1952 and the enactment of the FSIA in 1976. See Carl Marks & Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 841 F.2d 26, 27 (2d Cir.1988) (finding that "only after 1952 was it reasonable for a foreign sovereign to anticipate being sued in United States courts......