WILLY'S GROCERY

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (58 total)

• Verlinden B. v. V. Cent. Bank of Nigeria, 461 U.S. 480 (U.S. 1983)
  …t. In 1975, Nigeria entered into 109 cement contracts with 68 suppliers. For a description of the general background of these events, see Texas Trading & Milling Corp. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, 647 F. 2d 300, 303-306 (CA2 1981), cert. denied, 454 U. S. 1148 (1982). See also Trendtex Trading Corp. v. Central Bank of Nigeria, [1977] Q. B. 529. The parties do not seriously dispute the fact that these unilateral amendments constituted violations of Article 3 of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documen…
• Republic of Argentina v. Weltover, Inc., 504 U.S. 607 (U.S. 1992)
  …legislate rather than jurisdiction to adjudicate, this passage of the House Report has been charitably described as “a bit of a non sequitur,” Texas Trading & Milling Corp. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, 647 F. 2d 300, 311 (CA2 1981), cert. denied, 454 U. S. 1148 (1982). Of course the generally applicable principle de minimis non curat lex ensures that jurisdiction may not be predicated on purely trivial effects in the United States. But we reject the suggestion that § 1605(a)(2) contains any unexpressed r…
• Harris Corp. v. Nat'l Iranian Radio & Television & Bank Melli Iran, 691 F.2d 1344 (11th Cir. 1982)
  …ffect sufficiently ‘direct’ and sufficiently ‘in the United States’ that Congress would have wanted an American court to hear the case?” Texas Trading and Milling Corp. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, 647 F. 2d 300, 313 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1148, 102 S.Ct. 1012, 71 L.Ed.2d 301 (1982). The answer is yes. The letter of credit arrangement — which was structured according to the wishes of the appellants — extends into this country, and the appellants’ demands thus have significant, foreseeabl…

  ← 1 / 2 →