Banco Nunez Attorneys File 31-Page Reponse To Societe Generale Motion To Dismiss: “SocGen does not dispute that BNC is a trafficker; that’s because it is.”

Plaintiff attorneys for Banco Nunez file thirty-one page response to Motion To Dismiss by Paris, France-based Societe Generale 

“SocGen does not dispute that BNC is a trafficker; that’s because it is.” 

“LEGAL ARGUMENT  

This Court should deny SocGen’s Motion. The reasons to do so are as follows:  

First, Plaintiff’s claim is an appropriate action under Helms-Burton. Cuba’s BNC engages in trafficking under Helms-Burton by managing, possessing, and engaging in commercial activity using the Plaintiff’s equity interests in BNC that resulted from the 1960 uncompensated confiscation of Banco Nuñez and Inmobiliaria Norka, S.A. Helms-Burton liability extends to all entities who participate in or profit from BNC’s trafficking or its related commercial activities, including SocGen.  

Second, Plaintiff has standing to bring its claim. The injury for which Plaintiff seeks redress—uncompensated trafficking in the Nuñezes’ property—is traceable to SocGen, which is profiting from the illicit trafficking without Plaintiff’s consent.  

Third, this Court has personal jurisdiction over SocGen under the federal long-arm statute. That statute is applicable because the Helms-Burton claim arises under federal law and SocGen is not subject to general jurisdiction in the United States. Federal due process permits assertion of specific jurisdiction in this instance because SocGen engaged in $15 billion or more of transactions in the United States involving BNC, and those transactions are related to Plaintiff’s cause of action.  

Fourth, U.S. nationals held a claim for trafficking in confiscated property as of March 1996. Their claims are not defeated simply because they were assigned to a Florida corporation a month after President Clinton suspended all private rights of action under Helms-Burton.  

Fifth, the domestic takings rule is not a bar to Plaintiff’s Helms-Burton claim. That rule states that expropriations of a foreign national’s property by the foreign national’s government do not violate international law. Congress did not limit Helms-Burton liability to confiscations in violation of international law, as Congress had done vis-à-vis the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Rather, Congress allows relief related to all confiscations by the Cuban Government, including for Cuban nationals who fled communist Cuba and became United States citizens thereafter.” 

LINK To Complete 31-Page Filing  

SUCESORES DE DON CARLOS NUNEZ Y DONA PURA GALVEZ, INC., BDA BANO NUNEZ V. SOCIÉTÉ GÉNÉRALE, S.A., D/B/A SG AMERICAS, INC.; THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA, D/B/A SCOTIA HOLDINGS (US) INC., A/K/A THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA, MIAMI AGENCY; THE NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA, D/B/A NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.; AND BANCO BILBAO VIZCAYA ARGENTARIA, S.A., D/B/A BBVA, USA., 

Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton, LLP (plaintiff) and Law Offices Of Paul Sack A. Law, P.A. (plaintiff) 

Mayer Brown LLP (defendant) and ReedSmith LLP (defendant) 

LINK To All Case Filings