Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
1 Shortly after BANCEC was dissolved, the parties filed a stipulation agreeing to the substitution of the Republic of Cuba as plaintiff. The district court approved the stipulation; however, no amended complaint was filed, and apparently for this reason BANCEC remained as the nominal plaintiff. The case lay dormant until 1975, when BANCEC filed a motion for substitution of Cubazucar, a Cuban state trading company, as plaintiff. Citibank opposed the motion, and the district court denied it on the ground that such a substitution would unnecessarily multiply the complications in the already complicated litigation.
2 505 F. Supp. 412, 428 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).
3 658 F.2d 913, 920 (2d Cir. 1981).
4 103 S. Ct. 2591, 2597 (citing 28 U.S.C. §1606).
5 Id. at 2603 (relying on National City Bank v. Republic of China, 348 U.S. 356, 361–62 (1955)).
6 103 S. Ct. at 2603.
7 Id. at 2603–04.
8 Separate Opinion, id. at 2605 n.2.