Defendant moves to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to rule 106 (subds. 1, 2) and rule 107 (subds. 1, 2) of the Rules of Civil Practice. Only so much of the motion as is based on subdivision 2 of rule 106 need be passed upon. A previous motion under that provision addressed to the original complaint was granted by Mr. Justice Spector (N. Y. L. J., May 29, 1957, p. 6, col. 4). In the original complaint it was alleged that plaintiff was “ an agency of the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Argentina ”. Mr. Justice Spector sustained, on the authority of Royal Norwegian Navy v. Smith Steel Co. (185 Misc. 880) defendant’s claim that the complaint was defective on its face since it did not appear that plaintiff was either a person or a corporation and since there was thus no showing that plaintiff had capacity to sue. No appeal having been taken, this decision is the law of this case. On the amended complaint there has been inserted, after the quoted words, the following 11 having the right and power under the Laws of the
