About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - April 2021)

handle is hein.ali/rethdfr0044 and id is 1 raw text is: THE FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE
C.A.2, 2020. Cit. generally in ftn. In a dispute arising from foreclosure proceedings initiated by county
against property owned by Indian tribe to collect unpaid real-estate taxes, this court affirmed the district
court's finding that the proceedings were barred by tribal sovereign immunity, holding that the common-
law exception to sovereign immunity for suits concerning immovable property did not apply. The court
noted that, when describing the exception, courts had looked to the Restatement Second of Foreign
Relations Law of the United States, which predated the enactment of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities
Act, and that nothing in the Restatement Third or Restatement Fourth, which postdated the Act,
appeared to alter the court's analysis. Cayuga Indian Nation of New York v. Seneca County, New York,
978 F.3d 829, 839.
Ariz.App.2020. Cit. generally in disc. The Netherlands, as assignee of a judgment obtained from the
Dutch judiciary arising from a contract dispute against helicopter company and subsidiary, brought an
action for recognition of foreign judgment in Arizona. The trial court entered an order recognizing the
foreign judgment and granted the Netherlands' motion for summary judgment. This court affirmed,
holding that the foreign judgment was recognizable under state foreign-judgment recognition statutes,
because the Netherlands had a reciprocal system for recognizing foreign judgments and the judgment
was not penal in nature. The court noted that it looked to the Restatement Third of Foreign Relations
Law for determining questions surrounding the recognition of foreign judgments in the United States.
State of Netherlands v. MD Helicopters Inc., 462 P.3d 1038, 1049.
§ 101. International Law Defined
D.P.R.2020. Quot. in ftn. After the U.S. Coast Guard, acting with permission from the Venezuelan
government, searched a Venezuela-flag vessel in a known drug-trafficking area located south of the
United States Virgin Islands and found narcotics, a grand jury indicted several members of the vessel's
crew for violations of the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act. This court denied the crew members'
motions to dismiss, in which they asserted that the Act was unconstitutional, holding that the exercise of
extraterritorial jurisdiction was proper pursuant to the territorial principle under international law, as
defined in Restatement Third of Foreign Relations Law § 101. The court noted that, although the crew
members were foreign citizens, the vessel was registered in Venezuela, and the interdiction occurred on
the high seas, the Act nonetheless applied because the flag state provided consent to prosecute. United
States v. Marcano-Godoy, 462 F.Supp.3d 88, 95.
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most