David Shapiro v. The Republic of Bolivia, the Bolivian Air Force and the Central Bank of Bolivia

How courts have described this case

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

• indicating that a foreign state’s filing of two prior actions in federal court for the return of notes it had issued were “distinct from the instant litigation,” which involved a bona fide purchaser’s attempt to collect on one such note
• explaining that while “Congress left it to the courts to define the contours of ‘substantial contact’ between a foreign state’s commercial activity and the United States,”-Congress “elear[ly] ... intended a tighter nexus than the ‘minimum contacts’ standard for due process”
• rejecting argument that “a suit by a foreign sovereign in a United States court with respect to a particular matter constitutes a waiver of immunity from jurisdiction as to associated claims.”
• noting that legislative history of § 1605(a)(1
• “Under the FSIA . . . personal jurisdiction equals subject matter jurisdiction plus valid service of process.”
• “[U]nless one of the statutory exceptions applies, a federal court is without subject matter jurisdiction to hear the instant action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).