United States v. Belmont case brief summary (1937; US)
Procedural History: district court held in favor of Belmont. At supreme courtlevel.
A Russian corporation had deposited money with a private banker in NY, Belmont. The money later became property of the Soviet Government, b/c of a decree that nationalized all of the corporation assets, and the Soviet government wanted the money.
Respondents (Belmont's executors) refused to pay, b/c the bank deposit was located in NY, and the decree couldn’t be enforced there, so to them it was still the property of the corporation, otherwise it would be an act of confiscation.However, there was an exchange of diplomatic correspondence between the US and the Soviet Union, whose purpose was to bring about a final settlement of claims btwnthe 2 countries.
However, the Soviet Union would take no steps to enforce any claims against US nationals; instead, the US would handle this. So, if the court would allow the US to handle this, it would be in contrary to NY public policy.
Issue: Whether the US can handle this dispute, where the result would be contrary to NY public policy.
Outcome: Reversed, judgment for US.
Reasoning: No state policy can prevail against a federal treaty, and the international compact here. Governmental powers over external affairs is exclusive to the national government. Especially when the treaty required the consent of the senate, where a judicial authority is invoked, state policies are irrelevant to the inquiry and decision.
Executive agreement• Different from curtiss-wright.
President entered into agreement on his own, without Congress delegating the power Congress here did not pass a specific law like in Curtiss-Wright