Magness v. Russian Federation
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
247 F.3d 609 (2001)
- Written by David Bloom, JD
Facts
Descendants of the Magness family (the descendants) (plaintiffs) filed suit against the Russian Federation (Russia); its political subdivision, the Ministry of Culture (the ministry); and a Russian state agency, the State Diamond Fund (defendants), alleging that during the Bolshevik Revolution, the former Soviet Union illegally confiscated property that belonged to the Magness family. The descendants sought damages and a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent certain family jewels from leaving the jurisdiction. After the district court set a deadline to serve the summons and complaint, the descendants initially served the attorneys who represented Russia at the TRO hearing. The descendants also served the Texas Secretary of State and the United States State Department with certain forwarding instructions and mailed the papers directly to the Russian Deputy Minister of Culture in Moscow. It was not known who from that agency signed for the documents upon receipt or if any Russian government officials actually saw the documents. None of these methods strictly complied with the service requirements of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). The district court nevertheless granted the descendants a default judgment and denied a motion by Russia, the ministry, and the State Diamond Fund to vacate the default judgment, finding that the methods of service substantially complied with the FSIA. Russia, the ministry, and the State Diamond Fund appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jolly, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.