BUSINESS LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

BUSINESS LAW - Essay ExampleConstitution, obligate III, Section 2, Clause 1, and 28 United States Judicial Code 1332(a)(2). U.S. Const. art. III, 2, cl. 1. grants federal judicial power over all cases that are between a U.S. State or the citizen of a U.S. State and any unusual States, Citizens or Subjects. 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(2) provides for jurisdiction over a civil action that is between the citizen(s) of a U.S. State, and the citizens or prevail overs of a hostile state.The complainant attempted to sue Albert Khalily and D.A.Y. Kids Sportswear, Inc., in the Southern District of in the altogether York, on the basis of alleged breach of contract. Both defendants were incorporated in the State of New York. The complainant holded the right to bring suit in a U.S. apostrophize under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(2), which grants jurisdiction to the flirt over civil disputes between U.S. citizens and citizens or subjects of a orthogonal state.During the breach of contract case, in June 19 96, the court, of its accord, brought up the issue of whether it had proper jurisdiction over the matter. After the parties involved had briefed the issue, in August 1996, the court dismisssed it on the basis of lack of jurisdiction, having persistent that, for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, Hong Kong is not a foreign state, and, therefore, the plaintiff cannot be considered a citizen or subject of one.(a) no. Issue(s) (a) Does Hong Kong merit the legal status of a foreign state, thus allowing Matimak the status of a citizen or subject of a foreign state for the purposes of alienism jurisdiction(b) Does Matimak have the status of a citizen or subject of the United Kingdom because of the Hong Kongs status as a British Dependent Territory, when Matimak brought suit(c)Does every non-U.S. citizen, in fact, have the right to claim alienage jurisdiction, when engaged in a civil dissent with a U.S. citizen Holding (a) No. Hong Kong is not recognized a foreign state by the Execu tive sleeve of the U.S. regimen, therefore, Matimak is not a citizen or subject of a foreign state for the purposes of alienage jurisdiction.(b) No. Matmak is not a citizen or subject of the United Kingdom because the United Kingdom does not recognize corporations founded in Hong Kong as its citizens or subjects.(c) No. Only the citizens or subjects of foreign states which are recognized as being sovereign states by the U.S. Government may claim alienage jurisdiction.Reasoning (a) The definition of foreign state is not explicitly provided indoors the Constitution, nor in the relevent law. However, 13B C. Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, Federal Practice & Procedure 3604 (1984) holds that the generally recognized definition of a foreign state, for purposes of U.S. legal status is a state that is recognized formally by the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.The Court used this definition to provide a ruling on the question of alienage jurisdiction in Iran Handicraft and Carpe t Export Center v. Marjan International Corp., 655 F. Supp. 1275 (S.D.N.Y.), affd, 868 F.2d 1267 (2d Cir. 1988). At that time, the Court determined that because only the President has the power to receive Foreign Ministers, formal recognition of foreign states is solely the realm of the Executive Bra