Case Name: Lee N. KOEHLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The BANK OF BERMUDA (NEW YORK) LIMITED, a New York Corporation, the Bank of Bermuda Limited, a Bermuda Corporation, Reefs Beach Club Limited, a Bermuda Corporation, and A. David Dodwell, a Bermuda citizen, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2000-09-25
Citations: 229 F.3d 424
Docket Number: No. 98-9624
Parties: Lee N. KOEHLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The BANK OF BERMUDA (NEW YORK) LIMITED, a New York Corporation, the Bank of Bermuda Limited, a Bermuda Corporation, Reefs Beach Club Limited, a Bermuda Corporation, and A. David Dodwell, a Bermuda citizen, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Present: NEWMAN, CARDAMONE, JACOBS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 229
Pages: 424–425

Head Matter:
Lee N. KOEHLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The BANK OF BERMUDA (NEW YORK) LIMITED, a New York Corporation, the Bank of Bermuda Limited, a Bermuda Corporation, Reefs Beach Club Limited, a Bermuda Corporation, and A. David Dodwell, a Bermuda citizen, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 98-9624.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued: Aug. 30, 1999.
Decided: April 10, 2000.
Order Amending Opinion Filed: Sept. 25, 2000.
Present: NEWMAN, CARDAMONE, JACOBS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
The opinion of the Court, issued as a slip opinion beginning on page 2273, and reported in the Federal Reporter at 209 F.3d 130, is amended as follows:
In the penultimate sentence of the penultimate paragraph, i.e., slip op. p. 2288, last line (209 F.3d at 139, right-hand column, line 3), a call for a new footnote 1 is added at the word "case"; the text of the new footnote 1 is as follows:
1. The writer and Judge Newman feel constrained by the precedential force of Matimak. Were the question open in this Circuit, both would rule that citizens of Bermuda and other British Dependent Territories are sufficiently subject to the sovereignty of the United Kingdom to sat isfy the alienage clause of the diversity statute, even though the U.K. might not regard them as U.K. subjects for all purposes of U.K. law.