Wells Fargo Asia Ltd. v. Citibank, N.A.

936 F.2d 723 (1991)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Wells Fargo Asia Ltd. v. Citibank, N.A.

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
936 F.2d 723 (1991)

Facts

Wells Fargo Asia Ltd. (Wells Fargo) (plaintiff) maintained deposits at the Philippines branch of Citibank, N.A. (defendant). The Philippine government imposed a requirement prohibiting Citibank from repaying Wells Fargo without government approval. Wells Fargo sued Citibank in New York federal court for breach of contract, predicating federal jurisdiction on diversity of citizenship and the presence of a federal question. The district court ruled that New York law applied due to New York’s interest in the dispute based on its position as a world financial capital, the parties’ reasonable expectations, and the facts that (1) Citibank’s headquarters were in New York and (2) the parties’ transactions were denominated in United States dollars and were settled via their New York correspondent banks. The district court further ruled that under New York law, a parent bank was liable for the obligations of its foreign branch and that Citibank failed to act in good faith in seeking government approval to pay Wells Fargo, rendering it unnecessary to decide whether the government’s refusal to consent would excuse Citibank’s nonperformance. Additionally, the district court found that the parties did not enter into any agreement regarding where Wells Fargo could collect repayment. The district court noted that it might have reached a different conclusion had the Philippine government confiscated or expropriated Wells Fargo’s money rather than imposing a repayment-approval requirement. Citibank appealed, arguing, among other things, that federal policy required that depositors bear the risk of foreign-law impediments to the repayment of deposits. Wells Fargo responded that (1) the district court’s rulings were correct and (2) Citibank was wrong about federal policy. Wells Fargo further contended that Citibank demonstrated its ability to obtain government-payment approval because Citibank undisputedly obtained permission to pay itself at least $25 million in profits from the Philippines and that Citibank should use some of these profits to repay Wells Fargo.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kearse, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied 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
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 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
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership