Abecassis v. Wyatt
785 F. Supp. 2d 614
S.D. Tex.2011Background
- Oil-for-Food Program escrow monitored by UN; funds restricted to humanitarian use; OFAC licenses issued for U.S. entities to trade with Iraq.
- Plaintiffs are eight U.S. nationals or relatives injured in Israel during 2001–2002 attacks; claim AT A and related liability theories.
- Allegations target Wyatt/Coastal/El Paso and affiliates for kickbacks to Hussein’s regime used to fund terrorism.
- Amended ATA complaint asserts successor/alter-ego theories and respondeat superior for Wyatt/Coastal and El Paso entities.
- March 31, 2010 order dismissed most claims; plaintiffs permitted to amend ATA claims; venue transferred from DC to SDTX.
- Court denies most motions to dismiss except conspiracy, §2332(d) for Bayoil/NuCoastal Panama, and limitations; converts limitations to summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of scienter and causation for ATA claims | Plaintiffs allege knowledge of OFP kickbacks funded terrorism and proximate causation. | Defendants contend lack of scienter and insufficient causal link to injuries. | ATA claims viable; knowledge/intent standards met for primary and aiding theories; conspiracy dismissed. |
| Conspiracy liability under the ATA | Allegations show agreement among defendants to fund or facilitate terrorism. | No concrete agreement or common plan proven to target Americans. | Conspiracy claims dismissed. |
| Liability under 18 U.S.C. § 2332d for financial transactions | Defendants engaged in OFP-compliant transactions; knowledge of state sponsorship alleged. | Procedural/foreign-entity limitations and lack of direct Iraq government transaction. | ATA §2332d claims viable against El Paso and certain defendants; Bayoil/NuCoastal Panama dismissed. |
| Imputed liability theories (de facto merger/alter ego/respondeat superior) | El Paso/Coastal relationship and Wyatt’s role impose liability; agency/merger theories viable. | Allegations are conclusory; insufficient notice under Rule 12(b)(6). | De facto merger/alter ego dismissed; respondeat superior survives for Wyatt’s acts; other imputations rejected. |
| Limitations and tolling of ATA claims | Equitable tolling or tolling evidence renders claims timely. | Equitable tolling not warranted; claims untimely under a four-year accrual period. | Limitations issues converted to summary judgment; tolling questions require development of outside record evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Boim v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief & Development (Boim III), 549 F.3d 685 (7th Cir. 2008) (establishes donor liability framework for ATA §2333)
- Boim v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief & Development (Boim I), 291 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir. 2002) (proximity/causation and liability framework for ATA claims)
- Linde v. Arab Bank, 384 F. Supp. 2d 571 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (recognizes secondary liability under ATA and Restatement tort principles)
- Terrorist Attacks I, 349 F. Supp. 2d 765 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (donor liability and proximate causation standards in ATA cases)
- Terrorist Attacks III, 462 F. Supp. 2d 561 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (proximate causation and knowledge principles in ATA contexts)
- Rothstein v. UBS AG, 772 F. Supp. 2d 511 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (HLP-inspired discussion on knowledge and secondary liability post-HLP)
- Wultz v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 755 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2010) (standing and proximate cause for ATA claims involving state sponsor)
- Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S. Ct. 2705 (2010) (clarifies knowledge standard for §2339B and distinguishes from §2339A/C)
- Chiquita Brands Int'l, Inc. Alien Tort Statute & Shareholder Derivative Litigation, 690 F. Supp. 2d 1296 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (proximity/causation framework for ATA secondary liability and conspiracy)