Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Banco De La Nacion and the Republic of Peru

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that certification should \not be a device for shifting the burdens of this Court to those whose burdens are at least as great\
• holding that New York's champerty statute was not violated where the \accused party's primary goal [was] found to be the satisfaction of a valid debt and its intent is only to sue absent full performance\ (quotations and citation omitted)
• noting that we “look first to the plain language of a statute and interpret it by its ordinary, common meaning” when interpreting a New York statute (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that we ʺlook first to the plain language of a statute and interpret it by its ordinary, common meaningʺ when interpreting a New York statute (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[w]here the language is ambiguous, we focus upon the broader context and the primary purpose of the statute” (quotation omitted)
• “Because it is our job to predict how the forum state’s highest court would decide the issues before us, we will not certify questions of law where sufficient precedents exist for us to make this determination.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).