22 U.S.C. § 282f

Jurisdiction and venue of actions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar

For the purpose of any action which may be brought within the United States or its Territories or possessions by or against the Corporation in accordance with the Articles of Agreement of the Corporation, the Corporation shall be deemed to be an inhabitant of the Federal judicial district in which its principal office in the United States is located, and any such action at law or in equity to which the Corporation shall be a party shall be deemed to arise under the laws of the United States, and the district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction of any such action. When the Corporation is a defendant in any such action, it may, at any time before the trial thereof, remove such action from a State court into the district court of the United States for the proper district by following the procedure for removal of causes otherwise provided by law.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1978–2024 · leading case: Concesionaria DHM, S.A. v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 307 F. Supp. 2d 553 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Concesionaria DHM, S.A. v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 307 F. Supp. 2d 553 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 1331 and 22 U.S.C. § 282f, which provides the federal courts with original jurisdiction over any action in which IFC is a party.”

Int'l Fin. Corp. v. GDK Sys., Inc., 711 F. Supp. 15 (D.D.C. 1989). · cites it 7× “Instead, plaintiff now claims that jurisdiction is proper pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 282f, *17 which confers original federal subject matter jurisdiction over actions brought by or against the IFC.”

Osseiran v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 552 F.3d 836 (D.C. Cir. 2009). “The statutory basis for the court's jurisdiction is the International Finance Corporation Act, 22 U.S.C. § 282f, which provides that any "action at law or in equity to which the [International Finance] Corporation shall be a party shall be deemed to arise under the laws of the…”

Manas Y Pineiro v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A., 443 F. Supp. 418 (S.D.N.Y. 1978). “But the Senators who are lawyers can determine whether or not that provision of the bill shall remain in it.”

Pan Atl. Grp., Inc. v. Repub. Ins., 878 F. Supp. 630 (S.D.N.Y. 1995). “§ 1452 (e); and 22 U.S.C. §§ 282f, 283f, 285f, 286g. The language also appears in 28 U.”

Enterasys Networks, Inc. v. Mexmal Mayorista, S.A. de C.V. (In re Dinastia, L.P.), 381 B.R. 512 (S.D. Tex. 2007). · cites it 2× “They further alleged that removal was appropriate under 22 U.S.C. § 282f, which provides that the U.”

AJ Ruiz Consultoria Empresarial S.A. v. Bank of China Ltd. (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2024). · cites it 2× “Venue is Improper The IFC Motion asserts that venue is improper under 22 U.S.C. § 282f and 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (f)(1) and that the Amended Complaint as against Defendant IFC should either be dismissed or transferred to the District of Columbia.”

AJ Ruiz Consultoria Empresarial S.A. v. Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A. (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2024). · cites it 2× “Venue is Improper The IFC Motion asserts that venue is improper under 22 U.S.C. § 282f and 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (f)(1) and that the Amended Complaint as against Defendant IFC should either be dismissed or transferred to the District of Columbia.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.