Banco Nacional De Cuba v. Sabbatino

United States Supreme Court
376 U.S. 398 (1964)


Facts

The United States imposed a reduction on its import quota for Cuban sugar. In retaliation, Cuba nationalized many companies in which U.S. nationals had interests. One such company was CAV, a sugar company in which Whitlock Farr (defendant), an American commodities broker, had an interest. Farr had contracted to buy a shipload of CAV sugar. After Cuba nationalized the company, Farr entered into a new agreement to buy the sugar from the Cuban Government. However, CAV promised to indemnify Farr for any losses suffered provided he would turn the sugar sales proceeds over to CAV instead of the Cuban government. Cuba assigned the bills of lading to its shipping agent, Banco Nacional (plaintiff), and Farr passed along the sugar and collected payments from his customers. Relying on the promise of indemnification from CAV, Farr passed along the proceeds to CAV instead of Cuba. Banco Nacional sued Farr for conversion of the bills of lading. It also sought to enjoin Sabbatino (defendant), the temporary receiver of CAV’s New York assets, from distributing the received proceeds. Farr defended on the ground that title to the sugar never passed to Cuba because the expropriation of CAV’s proceeds by Cuba violated international law. The district court granted summary judgment for Farr and Sabbatino as it found that the American act of state doctrine did not apply to a violation of international law by a foreign actor, and that Cuba’s expropriation violated international law. The appellate court affirmed, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is for members only. To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Issue

The issue section is for members only and includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Holding and Reasoning (Harlan, J.)

The holding and reasoning section is for members only and includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Dissent (White, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Here's why 10,000 law students rely on our case briefs:

  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students.
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet.
  • 7,515 briefs - keyed to 85 casebooks.
  • Uniform format for every case brief.
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language.
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions.
  • Ability to tag case briefs in an outlining tool.
  • Top-notch customer support.
Start Your Free Trial Now