Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic case brief summary
726 F.2d 774 (1984)
CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs, foreign citizens who were survivors and representatives of persons murdered in a foreign country, filed suit against defendants seeking compensatory and punitive damages. Plaintiffs alleged defendants were responsible for multiple tortious acts resulting from violations of the law of nations, United States' treaties, United States' criminal law and the common law. The trial court dismissed plaintiffs' actions for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and as being time barred under the applicable statute of limitations.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of plaintiffs' action. The court held that subject matter jurisdiction was lacking and that the suit was time barred under the applicable statute of limitations.
***
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
726 F.2d 774 (1984)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiffs appealed from the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia's dismissal of
their action alleging defendants committed multiple tortious acts in
violation of the law of nations, United States' treaties, United
States' criminal law, and common law for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction and statute of limitations violations.CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs, foreign citizens who were survivors and representatives of persons murdered in a foreign country, filed suit against defendants seeking compensatory and punitive damages. Plaintiffs alleged defendants were responsible for multiple tortious acts resulting from violations of the law of nations, United States' treaties, United States' criminal law and the common law. The trial court dismissed plaintiffs' actions for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and as being time barred under the applicable statute of limitations.
DISCUSSION
- The court affirmed the decision of the trial court.
- The court held that subject matter jurisdiction was not proper under either 28 U.S.C.S. § 1330 or 28 U.S.C.S. § 1602-1611 and that the action was not filed within the statute of limitations.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of plaintiffs' action. The court held that subject matter jurisdiction was lacking and that the suit was time barred under the applicable statute of limitations.
***
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment