Aurelius Capital Partners, LP v. THE REPUBLIC OF ARGENTINA

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that assets were not subject to execution under the FSIA because the. assets at issue were not “used for a commercial activity,” as Required by the Act
• reviewing ruling on request for post- judgment attachment for abuse of discretion
• “[T]he property that is subject to attachment and execution must be property in the United States of a foreign state (internal quotation marks omitted)
• \[T]he property that is subject to attachment and execution must ... have been 'used for a commercial activity' at the time the writ of attachment or execution is issued.\
• ʺ[T]he property that is 16 subject to attachment and execution must be property in the United States of a 17 foreign state . . . .ʺ (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).