LATVIAN BANK SAYS RULING ON JURISDICTION SHOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED Parex Bank v. Russian Sav. Bank | Secondary Sources | Westlaw

LATVIAN BANK SAYS RULING ON JURISDICTION SHOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED Parex Bank v. Russian Sav. Bank | Secondary Sources | Westlaw

View on Westlaw or start a FREE TRIAL today, LATVIAN BANK SAYS RULING ON JURISDICTION SHOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED Parex Bank v. Russian Sav. Bank, Secondary Sources
Skip Page Header

LATVIAN BANK SAYS RULING ON JURISDICTION SHOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED Parex Bank v. Russian Sav. Bank

6 No. 7 ANBLLLR 9Andrews' Bank & Lender Liability Litigation Reporter (Approx. 3 pages)

LATVIAN BANK SAYS RULING ON JURISDICTION SHOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED Parex Bank v. Russian Sav. Bank

6 No. 7 ANBLLLR 9Andrews' Bank & Lender Liability Litigation Reporter (Approx. 3 pages)

6 No. 7 Andrews' Bank & Lender Liab. Litig. Rep. 9
Andrews' Bank & Lender Liability Litigation Reporter
November 30, 2000
Forward Contracts
Copyright (c) 2000 Andrews Publications

LATVIAN BANK SAYS RULING ON JURISDICTION SHOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED

Parex Bank v. Russian Sav. Bank

Parex Bank of Latvia says New York is the proper jurisdiction in which to hear its forward contract dispute with Russian Savings Bank, and asserts that the Southern District of New York should not reconsider its decision. The court previously found...
End of Document© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.