State R decides to nationalize all property within its territory belonging to nationals of the United States. The United States objects that this violates international law, but State R goes ahead anyway. Afterward, R Bank, the national bank of State R, which has assumed ownership of all of the nationalized property, sells the expropriated goods of one Mr. Ess to Tee Co., a firm in the United States. Mr. Ess brings suit in a U.S. court demanding that Tee Co.

pay him for goods it received from State R. R Bank intervenes and asks the court to dismiss the suit, claiming that a decision by the court in favor of Mr. Ess would violate the act of state doctrine.

The U.S. State Department has declined an invitation to say what effect a decision would have on American foreign policy vis-à-vis State R. Should the court dismiss the case? Explain. kio58 Forum Non Conveniens