Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Iran National Airlines Corp. et al. v. Marschalk Co., Inc., et al., 1981 — 453 U.S. 919 · caselaw · US
Criminal Law · MBE-tested
Iran National Airlines Corp. et al. v. Marschalk Co., Inc., et al.
453 U.S. 919·Supreme Court of the United States·1981
with whom Justice Marshall and Justice Stevens join,
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 80-2127.
Iran National Airlines Corp. et al. v. Marschalk Co., Inc., et al.
[MAJORITY]
It is the opinion of this Court that the questions certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit must be answered as follows:
(1). Yes. See Dames & Moore v. Regan, ante, p. 654.
(2). Yes. See Dames & Moore v. Regan, ante, p. 654.
(3). The President’s action in nullifying the attachments did not constitute a taking of property for which compensation must be paid. We dismiss question (3) so far as it concerns whether the action of the President in suspending the claims constituted a taking of property for which compensation must be paid. See Dames & Moore v. Regan, ante, p. 654.
[DISSENT — Justice Powell,]
Justice Powell,
with whom Justice Marshall and Justice Stevens join,
dissenting.
I would dismiss the certificate, citing Dames & Moore v. Regan, ante, p. 654, announced today. The Court’s opinion in that case provides the only answers that this Court should give to the questions certified to us by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Having rendered an opinion on the subject of those questions, we should not answer them in monosyllables nor attempt a syllabus of a portion of the Court’s opinion. We recently have dismissed certification of questions where the Court has addressed the subject of the questions in a full opinion. Foley v. Carter, 449 U. S. 1073 (1981). See also United States v. Will, 449 U. S. 200 (1980).