Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.
| Decision Date | 24 June 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. 08-1191.,08-1191. |
| Citation | 130 S.Ct. 2869 |
| Parties | Robert MORRISON, et al., Petitioners, v. NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LTD. et al. |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
Thomas A. Dubbs, for petitioners.
George T. Conway, III, for respondents.
Matthew D. Roberts, for the United States as amicus curiae, by special leave of the Court, supporting respondents.
Eric Seiler, Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP, New York, NY, A. Graham Allen, Rogers Towers, P.A., Jacksonville, FL, George T. Conway, III, Counsel of Record, John F. Lynch, Carrie M. Reilly, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY, for Respondents.
Samuel Issacharoff, New York, NY, Thomas A. Dubbs, Counsel of Record, James W. Johnson, Richard W. Joffe, Barry M. Okun, Labaton Sucharow LLP, New York, NY, for petitioners.
We decide whether
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
163 cases
-
CONSERVANCY of Sw. Fla. v. UNITED States FISH, Case No. 2:10-cv-106-FtM-SPC
...matter jurisdiction of the court. Subject matter jurisdiction relates to the court's power to adjudicate a case. Morrison v. Nat'l Austl. Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869, 2877 (2010); Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 130 S. Ct. 1237, 1243 (2010). Plaintiffs assert federal jurisdiction under 28 U......
-
Kaw Nation of Oklahoma v. United States, No. 06-934L
...not to cross it and instinctive, as well as trained, reluctance to do so."Frankfurter, supra, at 535; see also Morrison v. Nat'l Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S.Ct. 2869, 2880 (2010) (rather than courts' "divining what 'Congress would have wished' if it had had addressed the problem[, a] more na......
-
Kaw Nation of Oklahoma v. United States
...not to cross it and instinctive, as well as trained, reluctance to do so."Frankfurter, supra, at 535; see also Morrison v. Nat'l Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S.Ct. 2869, 2880 (2010) (rather than courts' "divining what 'Congress would have wished' if it had had addressed the problem[, a] more na......
-
Atiffi v. Kerry
...to bepart of defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1). See Morrison v. Nat'l Australia Bank Ltd., 561 U.S. _, 130 S. Ct. 2869, 2877 (2010) (Rule 12(b)(1) applies when the question is subject-matter jurisdiction, which "refers to a tribunal's power to ......
Get Started for Free
11 firm's commentaries
-
The SEC Speaks: Enforcement Panel Discusses 2013 Priorities and Past Successes
...addition, he noted that, although federal courts continue to grapple with the scope of the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.,[14] the decision is becoming less important to the SEC's enforcement program because of the "Dodd-Frank fix" with respect to p......
-
Second Circuit Applies Morrison v. National Australia Bank To Allow Certain Extraterritorial Application Of RICO
...States. In doing so, the Second Circuit addressed the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010) [blog article here], which held that United States statutes are presumed not apply to extraterritorial conduct, unless Congress has ......
-
Second Circuit Applies Morrison To Criminal Prosecution Under Section 10(B) And Rule 10b-5
...In so holding, the Second Circuit made clear that the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010) [blog article here], that civil liability under Section 10(b) does not apply extraterritorially, extends to criminal conduct as well......
-
SEC Staff Issues Report On The Cross-Border Scope Of Private Rights Of Action For Securities Fraud
...The study, mandated by Congress following the United States Supreme Court's decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010), outlines a number of legislative options for extending the scope of private actions for international securities fraud that may provide a......
Get Started for Free
10 books & journal articles
-
Human Rights After Kiobel: Choice of Law and the Rise of Transnational Tort Litigation
...(discussing Kiobel's reliance on Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010), in interpreting when claims touch and concern the territory of the United States with sufficient force to displace the presumption). But see Ahmed v. Magan, No. 2:10-cv-00342, 2013 WL 4479077,......
-
Kedar S. Bhatia, Reconsidering the Purely Jurisdictional View of the Alien Tort Statute
...to violate an international law norm that satisfies Sosa’sId. at 4.Id. at 13.Id. at 4 (quoting Morrison v. Nat’l Austl. Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869, 2878 (2010)).Id. at 14; see also Morrison, 130 S. Ct. at 2883–84.Kiobel, No. 10-1491, slip op. at 14 (citing Morrison, 130 S. Ct. at 2883–88).I......
-
Aliens Among Us: Factors to Determine Whether Corporations Should Face Prosecution in U.S. Courts for their Actions Overseas
...26. See IIT v. Vencap, Ltd., 519 F.2d 1001, 1015 (2d Cir. 1975), abrogated on other grounds by Morrison v. Nat’l Austl. Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010). 518 LOUISIANA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 77 Commentators have suggested that the statute is rooted in the following federal powers: the grant of f......
-
Tyler G. Banks, Corporate Liability Under the Alien Tort Statute: the Second Circuit?s Misstep Around General Principles of Law in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
...View of the Alien Tort Statute, 27 EMORY INT’L L. REV. (forthcoming 2013).FED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3).Morrison v. Nat’l Austl. Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010).Id. at 2877.Id.; see also 15 U.S.C. §§ 10(b), 78aa (Supp. IV 2010).Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (2006).362 Id. at 504–07.See ......
Get Started for Free