Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Republic of Austria Vs. Altman

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 07, 2004

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

68 entries 6 linked 62 unlinked
Show
  1. Republic of Mexico Vs. Hoffman US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1945
    Relied / Followed
  2. Dole Food Co. Vs. Patrickson US Supreme Court · Apr 22, 2003
  3. Banco Nacional De Cuba Vs. Sabbatino US Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1964
  4. American Ins. Assn. Vs. Garamendi US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 2003
  5. Nixon Vs. Fitzgerald US Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1982
  6. Harlow Vs. Fitzgerald US Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1982
  7. Syllabus October Term, 2003 Republic of Austria V. Altmann
    Search
  8. Supreme Court of the United States Republic of Austria Et Al. V. Altmann
    Search
  9. b) This case is not controlled by Landgraf v. USI
    Search
  10. foreign states and their instrumentalities some present protection from the inconvenience of suit, Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson
    Search
  11. INS v. Cardoza&nbhyph
    Search
  12. Kennedy, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and Thomas, J., joined. Republic of Austria v. Altman
    Search
  13. Opinion of the Court Republic of Austria V. Altmann
    Search
  14. Supreme Court of the United States No. 03-13 Republic of Austria Et Al., Petitioners V. Maria
    Search
  15. s complaint. Born in Austria in 1916, respondent Maria V. Altmann
    Search
  16. s specific claims. Only the former conclusion concerns us here. Presuming that our decision in Landgraf v. USI
    Search
  17. s opinion in Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon
    Search
  18. the default rule announced in our opinion in Landgraf v. USI
    Search
  19. U. S., at 264 (quoting Bradley v. School
    Search
  20. U. S., at 264 (quoting Bowen v. Georgetown
    Search
  21. id. , at 269 (quoting Society for Propagation of the Gospel v. Wheeler
    Search
  22. Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United
    Search
  23. s provisions unquestionably apply to cases arising out of conduct that occurred before 1976. In Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson
    Search
  24. Argentine Republic v. Amerada
    Search
  25. See Underhill v. Hernandez
    Search
  26. and in Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic
    Search
  27. applicable even in disputes concerning conduct that predated the letter. See, e.g., National City Bank of N. Y. v. Republic
    Search
  28. arising from such acts must be obtained through diplomatic channels. Footnote 21 See, e.g., Flatow v. Islamic
    Search
  29. Sea Hunt, Inc. v. Unidentified
    Search
  30. Third Ave. Assoc. v. Consulate
    Search
  31. analysis of the existence or nonexistence of any State Department statements on the subject. Republic of Austria v. Altman
    Search
  32. Scalia, J., Concurring Republic of Austria V. Altmann
    Search
  33. s opinion, but add a few thoughts of my own. In Landgraf v. USI
    Search
  34. opinion of Kennedy, J.). It justifies this approach on the basis of Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United
    Search
  35. supra , at 951 (emphasis added), even if they happen sometimes to affect them. Republic of Austria v. Altman
    Search
  36. Breyer, J., Concurring Republic of Austria V. Altmann
    Search
  37. Christian Dior could sue and collect (for clothes sold before the abdication). See Ex-King Farouk of Egypt v. Christian
    Search
  38. see also Queen v. Bow
    Search
  39. cf. Ter K. v. The
    Search
  40. immunity, even though the events in question took place while a foreign government was its owner. Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson
    Search
  41. Compare conduct-related immunity discussed in, e.g. , Nixon v. Fitzgerald
    Search
  42. U. S. 731 , 749 (1982) (absolute official immunity), Harlow v. Fitzgerald
    Search
  43. New York & Cuba Mail Steamship Co. v. Republic
    Search
  44. Dayton v. Czechoslovak
    Search
  45. W. S. Kirkpatrick & Co. v. Environmental
    Search
  46. Dames & Moore v. Regan
    Search
  47. Hwang Geum Joo v. Japan
    Search
  48. Republic of Austria V. Altmann
    Search
  49. Landgraf v. USI
    Search
  50. Petitioners V. Maria
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial