1 550 F. Supp. 869, 872 (citing Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. State of Russia, 21 F.2d 396, 401 (2d Cir. 1927)).

2 550 F. Supp. at 873 (relying on Sugarman v. Aeromexico, Inc., 626 F.2d 270 (3d Cir. 1980), and Behring Int’l, Inc. v. Imperial Iranian Air Force, 475 F. Supp. 383 (D.N.J. 1979)).

3 Class actions seeking $619 million from the Soviet Union have already been filed to recover on bonds that were issued by the Imperial Russian Government in 1916 and then repudiated by the Bolshevik Government. Other nations in default in dollar bonds include Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Bolivia. Wall St. J., Sept. 9, 1982, at 44. See also N.V. Times, Sept. 9, 1982, at D10.

4 Wall St. J., supra note 3.

5 1 G. Hackworth, Digest of International Law 539 (1940).

6 See generally G. Hackworth, supra note 5; O’Connell, D. P., State Succession in Municipal Law and International Law 239 (1967)Google Scholar; 1 Schwarzenberger, G., International Law 164(1957)Google Scholar; 1 Moore, J. B., Digest of International Law 249 (1906)Google Scholar. See also German Settlers in Poland, 1923 PCIJ, ser. B, No. 6.

7 Cf. Vilas v. City of Manila, 220 U.S. 345 (1911) (if municipal government enjoys the property rights of the former government, it also is subject to any liabilities associated with these rights).

8 Cf. the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the People’s Republic of China concerning the Settlement of Claims, signed May 11, 1979, 30 UST 1957, TIAS No. 9306, which provides that the PRC will pay $80.5 million as the “full and final settlement” of the claims of U.S. nationals “against the PRC arising from any nationalization, expropriation, intervention, and other taking of, or special measures directed against, property of nationals of the USA on or after October 1, 1949.”