Harris v. VAO Intourist, Moscow

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the inquiry required under the Act is distinct from the jurisdictional considerations set forth in International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945)
• rejecting an agent-principal relationship as sufficient to establish jurisdiction over the foreign principal under a nexus approach
• relationship between negligent operation of hotel in Moscow, resulting in fire causing death, and tourist agency operating in the United States “is so attenuated that this clause is not applicable”
• second clause of Section 1605(a)(2) not applicable where the allegedly negligent conduct took place in the Soviet Union
• the Act’s “legislative history suggests that implied waivers by commercial action are not consonant with [its] purposes; implicit waivers are reflected in actions relating to adjudication . . .”
• death from a hotel fire

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).