Legal Opinion
Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Republic of Peru
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 6, 1998No. 96 Civ. 7917(RWS), 96 Civ. 7916(RWS)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Elliott Associates, L.P. (“Elliott”) brought these actions to recover monies due and owing on foreign debt instruments it acquired by way of assignment in the secondary capital markets. Defendants The Republic of Peru (“Peru”) and Banco de la Nacion (“Banco”) (collectively, the “Peru Defendants”) concede the validity of the debt but deny that Elliott is a valid holder. They contend that the assignments, by two third-party banks, are void because Elliott committed “cham-perty” in purchasing the debt in violation of Section 489 of the New York Judiciary Law. Banco…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Banco Nacional De Cuba v. SabbatinoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Cruzan Ex Rel. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of HealthSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- John J. Kassner & Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Crary v. . GoodmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Pravin Banker Associates, Ltd. v. Banco Popular Del Peru and the Republic of PeruCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Red Tulip, LLC v. NeivaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Banco De La Nacion and the Republic of PeruCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Franklin Pavkov Construction Co. v. Ultra Roof, Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 1999
- Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Banco de la NacionDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Turkmani v. Republic of BoliviaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.