Bodoff v. Islamic Republic of Iran
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170768
| D.D.C. | 2012Background
- This is a suit under FSIA § 1605A arising from the Hamas bus bombing in Jerusalem that killed Yonathan Barnea, a U.S. citizen, in 1996.
- Plaintiffs are Barnea family members and Yonathan’s estate administrator seeking monetary damages.
- Iran and MOIS are defendants; MOIS is an Iranian agency, Iran designated a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984.
- The Court previously adjudicated related claims in Bodoff v. Iran under the former terrorism exception.
- Plaintiffs rely on updated § 1605A to recover compensatory and punitive damages for extrajudicial killing and material support to Hamas.
- Judgment seeks to confirm prior compensatory damages and obtain new punitive damages under the NDAA framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction under FSIA §1605A(a) established? | Barnea argues FSIA §1605A(a) provides original jurisdiction. | Iran/MOIS contest sufficient nexus or waiver. | JurisdictionEstablished under §1605A(a). |
| Waiver of sovereign immunity under §1605A(a)(2) satisfied? | Barnea asserts continuous state sponsor designation and national status. | Iran/MOIS contend no waiver due to forum location. | Waiver satisfied; immunity waived. |
| Liability under §1605A(a)(1)–(5) for extrajudicial killing and material support? | Barnea demonstrates Hamas acted as Iran/MOIS agent with substantial support. | Iran/MOIS challenge causation and agency links. | Liability established; extrajudicial killing and material support proven. |
| Damages under §1605A(c): compensatory and punitive? | Barnea seeks economic loss and punitive damages for outrage and deterrence. | Iran/MOIS resist large punitive amount due to due process concerns. | Compensatory $16,988,300; punitive $300,000,000 affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bodoff v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 424 F.Supp.2d 74 (D.D.C.2006) (established liability and damages framework; IIED and wrongful death findings)
- Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 879 F.Supp.2d 46 (D.D.C.2012) (discussed causation standards and 1605A principles)
- Rimkus v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 750 F.Supp.2d 163 (D.D.C.2010) (articulates need to justify recovery under civil tort theory)
- Beil v. Islamic Republic of Iran, N/A (N/A) (referenced for punitive damages framework (Beer v. Iran cited elsewhere))