Siemon-Netto (Netto) (defendant) was a member of the Society of Lloyd’s (Lloyd’s) (plaintiff), a traditional English market system consisting of the Council of Lloyd’s (Council) and members. Members were insurance underwriters, and the Council regulated the members. Lloyd’s was a private corporation with special powers granted by the United Kingdom Parliament. To become a member, a person had to sign a general-undertaking agreement that authorized the Council to enter future agreements on behalf of the member. The Council adopted a reconstruction plan pursuant to Lloyd’s bylaws and also signed the plan on behalf of members. The plan required members to pay insurance premiums to Lloyd’s. Netto failed to pay the premiums, and Lloyd’s successfully sued for breach of contract in an English court. Lloyd’s filed to enforce the English judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under the Uniform Foreign Money Judgment Recognition Act (the FMJRA). The district court struck all of Netto’s affirmative defenses and granted summary judgment for Lloyd’s. Netto appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Netto argued that the English judgment should not be recognized by a United States court, because the judgment was repugnant to the public policy of the District of Columbia. Netto argued this was the case because: Netto never signed the reconstruction plan, Lloyd’s bylaws violated English law, and Parliament illegally delegated government authority to Lloyd’s.