• September 29, 2008 |

    High Court Recognizes 'Absolute Protection' of Shield Law

    The state Supreme Court has declined to create an exception to Pennsylvania's Shield Law, refusing to compel disclosure of a newspaper's source even if that source were revealing secret grand jury

    1 minute read

  • December 2, 2011 | National Law Journal

    Privacy Case Focuses Justices on the Meaning of 'Actual Damages'

    In a case watched closely by privacy and whistleblower advocates, lawyers for an HIV-positive pilot and the federal government clashed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday over whether damages

    1 minute read

  • November 30, 2011 | National Law Journal

    'Actual Damages' at Issue in Privacy Suit Before High Court

    In a case watched closely by privacy and whistleblower advocates, lawyers for an HIV-positive pilot and the federal government clashed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday over whether damages

    1 minute read

  • January 27, 2009 | National Law Journal

    Justices protect workers from retaliation in job bias investigations

    WASHINGTON — A U.S. Supreme Court job bias decision protecting workers interviewed in an employer's internal investigation of discrimination is likely to lead to an increase in work

    1 minute read

  • January 27, 2009 | Legal Times

    Justices rule unanimously in five opinions

    The Supreme Court recessed for its long winter break Monday in a rare mood of unanimity, issuing five dissent-free opinions on key issues ranging from workplace discrimination to anti-dumping

    1 minute read

  • August 5, 2008 | National Law Journal

    High Court Asked to Consider Recusals

    The ethical hornets' nest stirred up by the refusal of an acting West Virginia chief justice to recuse himself from a multimillion-dollar appeal involving his major campaign contributor has rea

    1 minute read

  • March 1, 2004 | National Law Journal

    State justices may wait and see on gay marriage

    San Francisco�California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's decision to go directly to the state Supreme Court to defend California's definition of marriage won't likely bring an immediate

    1 minute read

  • February 24, 2003 |

    Superior Court Limits Frye Test To 'Novel' Scientific Evidence

    The majority of an en banc Superior Court panel has issued an opinion that attempts to update case law regarding the admissibility of scientific evidence and reinstates a $5 million verdic

    1 minute read

  • October 27, 2008 | National Law Journal

    All but two circuits interpret 'Twombly' broadly

    The U.S. Suprem t changed the landscape for motions to dismiss when it decided Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007). In Twombly, the Suprem

    1 minute read

  • NML Capital, Ltd. v. The Republic of Argentina, 12-105(L)

    Publication Date: 2013-08-27
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
    Judge: Before: Pooler, B.D. Parker, and Raggi, C.JJ.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: For Plaintiff-Appellee: NML Capital, Ltd., Matthew D. McGill, Jason J. Mendro, on the brief, Theodore B. Olson, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, D.C.; Robert A. Cohen, Eric C. Kirsch, Dechert LLP, New York, N.Y. For Plaintiff-Appellee: Olifant Fund, Ltd., Leonard F. Lesser, Simon Lesser, P.C., New York, N.Y. For Plaintiffs-Appellees: Pablo Alberto Varela, et al., Michael C. Spencer, Milberg LLP, New York, N.Y. For Plaintiffs-Appellees: Aurelius Capital Master, Ltd., ACP Master, Ltd., Blue Angel Capital I LLC, and Aurelius Opportunities Master Fund II, LLC., Edward A. Friedman, Daniel B. Rapport, Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP, New York, N.Y. Roy T. Englert, Jr., Mark T. Stancil, Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber LLP, Washington, D.C.
    for defendant: For Defendant-Appellant: The Republic of Argentina., Carmine D. Boccuzzi, Ezequiel Sanchez-Herrera, Sara A. Sanchez, Michael M. Brennan, on the brief, Jonathan I. Blackman, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York, N.Y. For Non-Party Appellant: The Bank of New York Mellon, as Indenture Trustee., Colin E. Wrabley, on the brief, James C. Martin, Reed Smith LLP, Pittsburg, Penn.; Eric A Schaffer, Reed Smith LLP, New York, N.Y. For Non-Party Appellants: The Exchange Bondholder Group., David A. Barrett, Nicholas A. Gravante, Jr., Steven I. Froot, on the brief, David Boies, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, New York, N.Y. Sean F. O'Shea, Michael E. Petrella, Daniel M. Hibshoosh, O'Shea Partners LLP, New York, N.Y. For Non-Party Appellant: Fintech Advisory Inc., William F. Dahill, Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP, New York, N.Y. For Intervenors: Euro Bondholders., Christopher J. Clark, Craig A. Batchelor, Michael E. Bern, Latham & Watkins, LLP, New York, N.Y. For Intervenor: ICE Canyon LLC., Bruce Bennett, James O. Johnston, Beong-Soo Kim, Jones Day, Los Angeles, Cal. Meir Feder, Jones Day, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae EM Ltd., in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees: David W. Rivkin, Suzanne M. Grosso, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, New York, N.Y. Amicus Curiae pro se, in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees: Ronald Mann, Esq., New York, N.Y. For Amici Curiae Montreux Partners, L.P. and Wilton Capital, in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees: Jack L. Goldsmith III, Cambridge, Mass.; Judd B. Grossman, Grossman LLP, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae the Washington Legal Foundation, in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees: Richard A. Samp, Cory L. Andrews, Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, D.C. For Amicus Curiae Prof. Kenneth W. Dam, in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees: Kevin S. Reed, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, N.Y. For Duane Morris Individual Plaintiffs — Appellees: Anthony J. Costantini, Rudolph J. Di Massa, Jr., Suzan Jo, Mary C. Pennisi, Duane Morris LLP, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae The Clearing House Association L.L.C., in support of Defendant — Appellant: Paul Saltzman, Joseph R. Alexander, The Clearing House Association L.L.C., New York, N.Y.; H. Rodgin Cohen, Michael M. Wiseman, Sergio J. Galvis, Joseph E. Neuhaus, Michael J. Ushkow, Jared P. Roscoe, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae Alfonso Prat-Gay, in support of Defendant-Appellant: Eugenio A. Bruno, Estudio Garrido, Buenos Aires, Argentina; M. Darren Traub, Akerman Senterfitt, LLP, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae Prof. Anne Krueger, in support of Defendant-Appellant: Edward Scarvalone, Doar Rieck Kaley & Mack, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae Euroclear Bank SA/NV, in support of Defendant-Appellant: Paul T. Shoemaker, Greenfield Stein & Senior LLP, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae Puente Hnos. Sociedad de Bolsa S.A., in support of Defendant-Appellant: Marco E. Schnabl, Timothy G. Nelson, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, N.Y. For Amicus Curiae the American Bankers Association, in support of Non-Party Appellant The Bank of New York Mellon., Matthew D. Ingber, Chrisopher J. Houpt, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, N.Y.; Charles A. Rothfeld, Paul W. Hughes, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, D.C.

    Case Number: 12-105(L)

    Cite as: NML Capital, Ltd. v. The Republic of Argentina, 12-105(L), NYLJ 1202616997114, at *1 (2d Cir., Decided August 23, 2013) 12-105(L) Before: