Document: 495 U.S. 660 110 S.Ct. 2034 109 L.Ed.2d 677 CITIBANK, N.A., Petitionerv.WELLS FARGO ASIA LIMITED. No. 88-1260. Argued March 19, 1990. Decided May 29, Syllabus Respondent Wells Fargo Asia Limited (WFAL), a Singapore-chartered bank wholly owned by United States-chartered bank, agreed to make two time deposits in Eurodollars—i.e., States dollars that have been deposited with banking institution located outside the country, corresponding obligation on part of repay dollars—with Citibank/Manila, branch petitioner Citibank, N.A. (Citibank), which is chartered States. The parties received telexes detailing deposits' terms from money broker who had arranged them. also exchanged slips confirming and stating repayment was occur New York. Citibank/Manila refused when they matured because Philippine government decree prevented it repaying them its assets. WFAL commenced suit District Court, claiming Citibank York liable for funds Citibank/Manila. Finding there distinction between "repayment," refers physical location transacting discharge debt, "collection," where assets may be taken satisfy court determined parties' confirmation established an agreement York, but neither express nor one could implied custom or usage Eurodollar market issue collected; no provision law barred making WFAL's collectible Manila; that, absence such agreement, law, rather than applied required found Citibank/Manila; look Citibank's worldwide satisfaction deposits. Court Appeals affirmed different grounds. It concluded Court's finding not clearly erroneous under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 52(a) reasoned general principles, if agree foreign deposit at another location, authorize demand collection location. Thus, held entitled collect out Held: 1. Appeals' factual premise permit contradicts determinations, are erroneous. Pp. 668-672. (a) distinguished "repayment" respecting "collection" and, quite specific terms, only made referred repayment. However, while saying this erroneous, appears viewed as interchangeable concepts, divisible ones. In responding argument bank's home office should bear risk restrictions payment has placed, unless do so, stated affirmance order based just agreement. Furthermore, support holding, relied authorities all turned upon existence, nonexistence, collection. 668-670. (b) findings—that repayment, collection—were While explicit would take place indicate fact, their language seems negate agreement's existence. broker's speak any about failed remit Moreover, fair reading contradictory testimony trial supports conclusion establish relevant practice international community inferred tacit understanding point. 670-672. 2. case remanded determine whether, permitted rights duties law. On remand, must applies content necessary construction opinion say relies state Alternatively, view controlling rule supplied federal common-law deposits, determination, subject further review deemed appropriate Court. premature consider other contentions necessity common pre-emptive effect statutes regulations reserves. 672-674. 852 F.2d 657, vacated remanded. KENNEDY, J., delivered REHNQUIST, C.J., BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, JJ., joined. filed concurring opinion, post, p. 674. STEVENS, dissenting Robert H. Bork, Washington, D.C., petitioner. Thomas W. Merrill, U.S., amicus curiae, supporting petitioner, special leave Darryl Snider, respondent. Justice KENNEDY 1 At here whether obligated use branches, after country's prohibited own 2 * arises transaction what known financial communities market. As defined term, Eurodollars States, dollars. See App. Pet. Cert. 42a; P. Oppenheim, International Banking 243 (5th ed. 1987). receiving can either bank. 3 A major component interbank trading. typical market, depositing (Bank A) agrees telephone telex, through broker, denominated second X). For deposit, Bank X bank; A, however, including To complete transactions, most banks participate trading utilize correspondent City, whom maintain, directly indirectly, accounts example, depositor orders B) transfer A's account X's Y). B Y accomplished means wire clearing mechanism City Clearing House Interbank Payments System, "CHIPS." Scanlon, Definitions Mechanics Transactions, 16, 24-25 (H. Prochnow 1970); Brief Association et al. Amici Curiae 4. Repayment end term having B, CHIPS system, credit account. 4 follows pattern. (WFAL) Bank, Petitioner operates Manila, Philippines (Citibank/Manila). June 10, 1983, $1 million rate earn interest set 10%, repaid December 9 1983. were oral assistance Asian written report stated, inter alia: 5 " 'Pay: Account Manila 6 'Repay: International, Ltd., Singapore # 003-023645.' 658-659 (CA2 1988). 7 sent telex containing following '[i]nstructions' ": 8 'Settlement—Citibank NA NYC AC 'Repayment—Wells Bk Intl Ac Ltd Sgp No 003-023645,' id., 659. 10 That same day, each read: 11 'We shall instruct Int'l our please pay a/c customer's USD 1,000,000.' Ibid. 12 13 'Please US Dlr 1,000,000 maturity we 1,049,444.44 your Corp NY York.' few months made, issued Memorandum Authorized Agent Banks (MAAB 47) provided part: 14 'Any remittance exchange principal obligations due and/or institutions, irrespective maturity, submitted Central [of Philippines] thru Management External Debt Investment Accounts Department (MEDIAD) prior approval.' 15 According Appeals, "[a]s interpreted Philippines, 'authorized agent bank' assets, i.e., those elsewhere invested non-Philippine enterprises." result, 16 present action against Southern lawsuit pending, obtained permission depositors extent so branch. paid $934,000; remainder $1,066,000, remains dispute. During course litigation, apparent consent government, continued outstanding principal. 48a. 17 After bench merits, accepted invitation assume governs action. saw booked offices considering affidavits parties, (1) incurred whole; (2) contravene MAAB 47; (3) therefore WFAL, even Id., 31a-35a. entered judgment appealed. 18 panel Second Circuit clarify basis judgment. ordered supplemental findings fact conclusions matters: 19 "(a) Whether debt repaid, Manila. 20 "(b) If essential terms? 21 "(c) (other precludes negates 22 "(d) (c) above, does control?" 26a. 23 response first query, concepts collection, defining "refer[ring] transfers effectuating occur," places plaintiff event fail repayment." 14a. collected. question, "[t]he relating York." 18a. third knew Finally, last restated follows: 24 "Hence, dispute . boils down question: plaintiff's deposits? words, much physically collectible, plaintiff. previously contract silent issue, interpret query (d) imposing us task deciding controls answer question." 19a. 25 choice-of-law rules, applied. reviewing 26 affirmed, Citing ordinary course, party makes court's view, these principles "normal limitation" altered depositor: "If location." F.2d, 660. noted 52(a), "to F.2d., 661. 27 We granted certiorari. 493 990, 537, 107 534 (1989). decide determinations vacate remand consideration additional legal questions case. II 28 Little need said operation stage case, reached both bar State 660-661; rather, allow point theories examined. indeed facts being within contemplation parties. second, alternative, theory permitting assuming duty event, creates contracted otherwise. A. Corbin, Contracts § 561, pp. 276-277 (1960). 29 noted, adopting did recovery Yet clear it, 30 constituted strongest indication interpreting manner argument, so. announced "[o]ur district agreement." 661 (emphasis added). 31 ruling well holding. cited three cases proposition particular authorizes involve applications act doctrine: Allied v. Banco Credito Agricola de Cartago, 757 516 (CA2), cert. dism'd, 473 934, 106 30, 87 706 (1985); Garcia Chase Manhattan 735 645, 650-651 1984); Braka Bancomer, S.N.C., 762 222, 225 1985). Each turns country irrelevant. Garcia, 646 (agreement "Chase's main guarantee certificate deposit] [the depositors] presenting worldwide"); 650 (purpose ensure matter happened Cuba, seizure still contractual presentation CDs"); supra, 522 Costa Rican banks' various loans "would excused Rica] provide payment"). Braka, controlled. 224-225 (specifically distinguishing ground guaranteed Mexico). By reliance cases, us, relying existence 32 Under reject itself acknowledged, record contains ample effecting matured, explicit: 664. 33 evidence offered regard "an concerning field" 16a-17a. Upon record, hold finding, existed intent York; indeed, Citibank/Manila's slip, "[a]t York," see 664 added), tends more 34 Nor contradict experts testified higher rates contrast dollar banks, reflected reserve insurance requirements imposed domestic This argues "payable only" 38 Stat. 270, amended, U.S.C. 461(b)(6), 64 873, 1813(l )(5). depositor's assumption "sovereign risk," actions control over render unable deposit. See, e.g., 354-367 (testimony Ian Giddy). 35 experts, hand, identical London despite conceded differences sovereign locations, reason, government. 270-272 Gunter Dufey). 36 least trial, allocation wide variance community. cannot left "the definite firm conviction" Gypsum Co., 333 364, 395, 68 525, 92 L.Ed. 746 (1948). Because holding contrary assumptions, reasoning used court. 37 Given question becomes nonetheless right, Dandridge Williams, 397 471, 475-476, n. 6, 90 1153, 1156-1157, 491 (1970), seeks defend below available 18, 23, 30-49. unclear controlling; applies, Thigpen Roberts, 468 27, 32, 104 2916, 2919, 82 (1984); Dandridge, S.Ct., 1156-1157 6. One supported think opinion. placed 645 1984), without citing discussing Perez 61 N.Y.2d 460, 474 N.Y.S.2d 689, 463 N.E.2d (1984). pointing decision conflict days earlier "similar facts." N.Y.2d, 464, 3, N.Y.S.2d, 693, N.E.2d, 9, 3. alignment authorities, reluctant resting moreover, "general principles" "United law," 660; semantic equivalent instance. 39 expertise commercial matters generally, or, deem appropriate. find §§ )(5)(A); CFR 204.128(c) (1990). All matters, addressed full correct resolution 40 vacated, proceedings consistent 41 ordered. 42 Chief concurring. 43 fairly inquire why certiorari granted. decides novel undecided simply recanvasses material already canvassed comes did. I believe granting plenary wise limited judicial resources. But grant decided considered merits. Ferguson Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., 352 521, 559, 77 457, 478, 511 (1957) (Harlan, dissenting). join 44 dissenting. 45 wisely narrow ground. Its ignores aspect critical importance me. 46 assumed loss caused insolvency branch, God.* so-called risk" excluded undertaking my exclusion product dispositive 47 Accordingly, affirm Appeals. E.g., 26; 15, 39-40; Tr. Oral Arg. (petitioner); 31-32 (United curiae petitioner).

Category: 8