Calderon-Cardona v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
867 F. Supp. 2d 389
| S.D.N.Y. | 2011Background
- Families of Calderon-Molina and Tirado-Ayala sued the DPRK and its CGIB under FSIA for furnishing arms to terrorists who killed them at Lod Airport in 1972; judgment entered in 2010 for $378 million, still unsatisfied.
- Judgment registered in SDNY in 2010; petitioners sought turnover of blocked EFTs from banks holding funds blocked under NKSRs.
- Petition sought attachment under TRIA § 201, FSIA § 1610(g), and NY CPLR §§ 5225(b), 5227; banks answered and discovery/briefing followed.
- Court deferred notice issues and ruled on threshold question of attachability of blocked EFTs under TRIA and FSIA.
- Court held the blocked EFTs were not attachable because they are not assets of North Korea or its agencies/instrumentalities, and ownership requirements were not met.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TRIA § 201 permits attachment of blocked assets of that terrorist party | North Korea qualified as terrorist party when judgment issued. | North Korea not a terrorist party under TRIA § 201(d); designation status ended in 2008; assets not owned by DPRK. | TRIA § 201 does not attach blocked EFTs because assets are not owned by North Korea or its agencies. |
| Whether FSIA § 1610(g) permits attachment of blocked EFTs | Assets blocked under NKSRs should be attachable as property of DPRK or its instrumentality. | Blocked EFTs are not property of DPRK or its agencies; not attachable under § 1610(g). | § 1610(g) does not permit attachment of blocked EFTs for lack of ownership by DPRK or its agencies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barnhart v. Sigmon Coal Co., Inc., 534 U.S. 438 (2002) (statutory interpretation starts with text and ordinary meaning)
- United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329 (1992) (tense and dictionaries inform statutory meaning)
- Dobrova v. Holder, 607 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2010) (present tense readings in TRIA analyzed)
- Ministry of Defense v. Elahi, 556 U.S. 366 (2009) (enforcement timing; asset status as blocked asset)
- Shipping Corp. of India Ltd. v. Jaldhi Overseas Pte Ltd., 585 F.3d 58 (2d Cir. 2009) (EFTs are not ownership-based property during intermediary transfers)
- Hausler v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, 740 F. Supp. 2d 525 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (notwithstanding clause and NKSRs influence TRIA preemption debate)
- Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 609 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2010) (dicta on TRIA preemption regarding treaties)