Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba

416 U.S. 981, 94 S. Ct. 2382
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided May 13, 1974·No. No. 73-1288·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted. Counsel in this case are directed to brief and argue the following questions:

1. Can statements by counsel for the Republic of Cuba, that petitioner’s unjúst enrichment countercláim would not be honored, constitute an act of state?

2. If so, is an exception to the act of state doctrine created, under First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba, 406 U. S. 759 (1972), where petitioner’s counterclaim does not exceed the net balance owed to Cuba on its claims by petitioner’s codefendants, and where all claims and counterclaims arise out of the subject matter in litigation in this case?

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba, 416 U.S. 981, 94 S. Ct. 2382 (1974).

416 U.S. 981 (Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rupali Bank v. Provident National Bank
403 F. Supp. 1285 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1975)
Stonehill v. Security National Bank
68 F.R.D. 24 (S.D. New York, 1975)
J. Zeevi & Sons, Ltd. v. Grindlays Bank
333 N.E.2d 168 (New York Court of Appeals, 1975)
United Bank Ltd. v. Cosmic International, Inc.
392 F. Supp. 262 (S.D. New York, 1975)