Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Samantar Vs. Yousuf

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 01, 2010

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

61 entries 2 linked 59 unlinked
Show
  1. Republic of Mexico Vs. Hoffman US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1945
  2. Dole Food Co. Vs. Patrickson US Supreme Court · Apr 22, 2003
  3. Syllabus October Term, 2009 Samantar V. Yousuf
    Search
  4. a) Under the common-law doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity, see Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon
    Search
  5. in part and concurring in the judgment. Scalia, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Samantar v. Yousuf
    Search
  6. Opinion of the Court Samantar V. Yousuf
    Search
  7. Supreme Court of the United States No. 08-1555 Mohamed Ali Samantar, Petitioner V. Bashe
    Search
  8. Id. , at 47a (quoting Velasco v. Government
    Search
  9. Central Bank of Nigeria , 461 U. S. 480 , 486 (1983), we explained that in Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon
    Search
  10. s claim of sovereign immunity, typically asserted on behalf of seized vessels. See, e.g. , Republic of Mexico v. Hoffman
    Search
  11. Navegacion Maritima, S. A. v. The
    Search
  12. Heaney v. Government
    Search
  13. Waltier v. Thomson
    Search
  14. Republic of Austria v. Altmann
    Search
  15. Argentine Republic v. Amerada
    Search
  16. to hold personhood separate from the natural persons who are its shareholders or officers. Cf. First Nat. City Bank v. Banco
    Search
  17. Cf. Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson
    Search
  18. does not encompass officials, because the types of defendants listed are all entities. See Russell Motor Car Co. v. United
    Search
  19. Cf. Kimbrough v. United
    Search
  20. United Nations v. City
    Search
  21. under the common law for individual officials even when the foreign state did not qualify. See, e.g. , Greenspan v. Crosbie
    Search
  22. of those acts when done within the territory of the foreign state. See Underhill v. Hernandez
    Search
  23. Chuidian v. Philippine
    Search
  24. the suit, regardless of whether the official is immune or not under the common law. See Republic of Philippines v. Pimentel
    Search
  25. be treated as actions against the foreign state itself, as the state is the real party in interest. Cf. Kentucky v. Graham
    Search
  26. s origin or aims to indicate that Congress similarly wanted to codify the law of foreign official immunity. v. Our
    Search
  27. Compare 552 F. 3d, at 381 (holding the FSIA does not govern the immunity of individual foreign officials), and Enahoro v. Abubakar
    Search
  28. CA7 2005) (same), with Chuidian v. Philippine
    Search
  29. under the FSIA), In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 , 538 F. 3d 71, 83 (CA2 2008) (same), Keller v. Central
    Search
  30. Bank of Nigeria , 277 F. 3d 811, 815 (CA6 2002) (same), Byrd v. Corporacion
    Search
  31. Forestal y Industrial de Olancho S. A. , 182 F. 3d 380, 388 (CA5 1999) (same), and El-Fadl v. Central
    Search
  32. could claim immunity on that basis, see Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon
    Search
  33. s practice of utilizing legislative history reaches well into its past. See, e.g. , Wallace v. Parker
    Search
  34. Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. Mortier
    Search
  35. Astoria Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Solimino
    Search
  36. the statute with the presumption that Congress intended to retain the substance of the common law. See Isbrandtsen Co. v. Johnson
    Search
  37. s invocation of the canon that a statute should be interpreted in compliance with international law, see Murray v. Schooner
    Search
  38. whether former officials are covered, an issue it settled with respect to instrumentalities, see Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson
    Search
  39. the Court, although I think that the citations to legislative history are of little if any value here. Samantar v. Yousuf
    Search
  40. Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). Samantar v. Yousuf
    Search
  41. be used. Ante , at 10, n. 9 (quoting Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. Mortier
    Search
  42. Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon
    Search
  43. Mohamed Ali Samantar, Petitioner V. Bashe
    Search
  44. Velasco v. Government
    Search
  45. Navegacion Maritima, S. A. v. The
    Search
  46. Cf. First Nat. City Bank v. Banco
    Search
  47. See Russell Motor Car Co. v. United
    Search
  48. United Nations v. City
    Search
  49. Greenspan v. Crosbie
    Search
  50. See Underhill v. Hernandez
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial