Legal Opinion
Credit Suisse v. United States District Court for the Central District of California
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 3, 1997No. 97-70193PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judge:
Credit Suisse and Swiss Bank Corporation (the “Banks”) petition this court for a writ of mandamus, prohibition or other appropriate extraordinary relief from the district court’s denial of the Banks’ motion to dismiss the action Rosales et al. v. Credit Suisse and *1344Swiss Bank Coup., No. CV 96-6419 (C.D.Cal.) (Real, J.) (“Rosales action”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Because the relief sought in the Rosales action would violate the act of state doctrine, we grant the petition.
I
A. The Multi-District Litigation
In Multi-District Litigation…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Catlin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Banco Nacional De Cuba v. SabbatinoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Holly W. BAUMAN Et Al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Respondent, Union Oil Company, Real Party in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- Underhill v. HernandezSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- W. S. Kirkpatrick & Co. v. Environmental Tectonics Corp., InternationalSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Rex K. DeGEORGE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, RespondentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Sarei v. Rio Tinto PLC.District Court, C.D. California · 2002
- John Doe I, Individually & as Administrator of the Estate of His Deceased Child Baby Doe I, & on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated Jane Doe I, on Behalf of Herself, as Administratrix of the Estate of Her Deceased Child Baby Doe I, & on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated John Doe II John Doe III John Doe IV John Doe v. Jane Doe II Jane Doe III John Doe Vi John Doe Vii John Doe Viii John Doe Ix John Doe X John Doe Xi, on Behalf of Themselves & All Others Similarly Situated & Louisa Benson on Behalf of Herself & the General Public v. Unocal Corporation, a California Corporation Total S.A., a Foreign Corporation John Imle, an Individual Roger C. Beach, an Individual, John Roe III John Roe Vii John Roe Viii John Roe X v. Unocal Corporation Union Oil Company of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Alexis Holyweek Sarei Paul E. Nerau Thomas Tamausi Phillip Miriori Gregory Kopa Methodius Nesiko Aloysius Moses Rapheal Niniku Gabriel Tareasi Linus Takinu Leo Wuis Michael Akope Benedict Pisi Thomas Kobuko John Tamuasi Norman Mouvo John Osani Ben Korus Namira Kawona Joanne Bosco John Pigolo Magdalene Pigolo, Individually and on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Rio Tinto, Plc Rio Tinted Limited, Alexis Holyweek Sarei Paul E. Nerau Thomas Tamausi Phillip Miriori Gregory Kopa Methodius Nesiko Aloysius Moses Rapheal Niniku Gabriel Tareasi Linus Takinu Leo Wuis Michael Akope Benedict Pisi Thomas Kobuko John Tamuasi Norman Mouvo John Osani Ben Korus Namira Kawona Joanne Bosco John Pigolo Magdalene Pigolo, Individually and on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Rio Tinto, Plc Rio Tinted LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Sea Breeze Salt, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.