MARIA v. ALTMANN, AN INDIVIDUAL, — v. REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA, a FOREIGN STATE AND THE AUSTRIAN GALLERY, AN AGENCY OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA, —

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 4669·327 F.3d 1246·2003 WL 1990017·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 8068
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 28, 200301-56003, 01-56398California383 words

Opinion

Opinion

ORDER

The Opinion filed December 12, 2002, slip op. 1, and appearing at 317 F.3d 954 (9th Cir.2002), is amended as follows:

1. At slip opinion 16; 317 F.3d at 964 , insert the following sentence after the citation to Verlinden B.V. v. Central Bank of Nigeria and before the sentence beginning “In 1943, the Supreme Court pronounced

This explanation made no distinction between in rem and in personam actions.

2. At slip opinion 16; 317 F.3d at 965 , insert the word “alleged” in the sentence beginning “Determining whether the FSIA ...” so that the sentence reads in full: “Determining whether the FSIA may properly be applied thus turns on the question whether Austria could legitimately expect to receive immunity from the executive branch of the United States for its alleged complicity in and perpetuation of the discriminatory expropriation of the Klimt paintings.”

3. At slip opinion 17; 317 F.3d at 965 , insert the word “allegedly” in the sentence beginning “That Austria and the United States ...” so that the sentence reads in full: “That Austria and the United States were no longer on opposite sides of World War II at the time the Federal Monument Agency allegedly attempted to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.