Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
President/Executive Department Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in President/Executive Department
International Law-Sovereign Immunity-State Court Authority To Determine Title To Property Under Its Jurisdiction Despite A Department Of State Suggestion Of Immunity, John A. Krsul Jr., S.Ed.
International Law-Sovereign Immunity-State Court Authority To Determine Title To Property Under Its Jurisdiction Despite A Department Of State Suggestion Of Immunity, John A. Krsul Jr., S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
In 1952 plaintiff brought a creditor's action for the appointment of a permanent receiver for the assets of the defendant located in New York. Defendant, Zivnostenska Banka, was a Czechoslovak corporation that had at one time been engaged in banking activities in New York. Plaintiff succeeded in having a receiver appointed upon proving that defendant had been nationalized, contrary to New York policy and law, by a 1950 decree of the Czechoslovak Government which had merged the defendant and its assets with the State Bank of Czechoslovakia. The instant controversy arose when the receiver attempted to set aside, as a …
International Law-Soverign Immunity-The First Decade Of The Tate Letter Policy, John M. Niehuss S.Ed.
International Law-Soverign Immunity-The First Decade Of The Tate Letter Policy, John M. Niehuss S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
On May 19, 1952, the State Department announced in the Tate Letter a new policy with regard to the filing of suggestions of immunity in suits against foreign sovereigns. The letter indicated that the Department would begin to follow a restrictive theory of sovereign immunity. This meant that it would file a suggestion of immunity if the case arose from acts of the foreign government or its agents which were of a purely governmental character (jure imperii), but would deny immunity in instances where the acts engaged in were of a commercial or proprietary nature which could be …
United States Department Of State, John M. Mathews
United States Department Of State, John M. Mathews
Michigan Law Review
In the conduct of foreign relations, the President, though ultimately responsible to the people for the general success or failure of such conduct, is unable, of course, to give his personal attention to any except what he deems to ,be the most important and momentous questions of policy. For handling the great mass of routine matters and even for the determination of many questions of policy which are of considerable importance, he is dependent upon the assistance of the agencies supplied for that purpose. These agencies are, principally, the department of state, the diplomatic service, and the consular service. These …