Lasheen v. Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt
625 F. App'x 338
9th Cir.2015Background
- Mohamed Lasheen sued the Egyptian Embassy and related defendants under ERISA for denial of medical benefits under a plan sponsored by the Embassy.
- District court entered default judgment after defendants repeatedly failed to participate and missed a mandatory status conference.
- Plaintiff sought the plan’s maximum lifetime benefit ($200,000) and submitted affidavits and medical records showing treatment costs exceeding $250,000.
- Defendants argued the district court should not have entered default judgment, should have held an evidentiary hearing on damages, and erred in awarding attorneys’ fees.
- The Ninth Circuit previously held defendants were not entitled to sovereign immunity under the FSIA commercial-activity exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether default judgment was properly entered | Defendants’ conduct justified default; complaint made a prima facie case | Entry was erroneous given sporadic participation | Affirmed: district court did not abuse discretion in entering default judgment under FSIA §1608(e) and Eitel factors |
| Whether a damages hearing was required | Lasheen shown damages via affidavits/records; amount ascertainable | Hearing required to prove entitlement to lifetime benefit | Affirmed: no evidentiary hearing required because damages were ascertainable from submitted records |
| Whether plaintiff proved entitlement to lifetime benefit | Complaint and records established entitlement under 29 U.S.C. §1132(a)(1)(B) | Insufficient proof of entitlement to lifetime benefit | Affirmed: prima facie showing satisfied for default judgment |
| Whether attorneys’ fees award was proper and reasonable | Fees appropriate under ERISA; defendants caused delays | Fees/amount unreasonable or inappropriate | Affirmed: district court considered Hummell factors and did not abuse discretion in awarding fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1980) (standard of review for default-judgment decisions)
- Moore v. United Kingdom, 384 F.3d 1079 (9th Cir. 2004) (FSIA §1608(e) requires prima facie showing for default judgments)
- Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1986) (factors for default-judgment disposition)
- Meadows v. Dominican Republic, 817 F.2d 517 (9th Cir. 1987) (default due to defendants’ culpable conduct)
- TCI Grp. Life Ins. Plan v. Knoebber, 244 F.3d 691 (9th Cir. 2001) (culpability standard for default)
- Egelhoff v. Egelhoff, 532 U.S. 141 (U.S. 2001) (overruling on other grounds noted)
- Geddes v. United Fin. Grp., 559 F.2d 557 (9th Cir. 1977) (plaintiff must prove amount of damages after default)
- Davis v. Fendler, 650 F.2d 1154 (9th Cir. 1981) (when district court may determine damages without a hearing)
- McConnell v. MEBA Med. & Benefits Plan, 778 F.2d 521 (9th Cir. 1985) (discretion to award attorneys’ fees under ERISA)
- Hummell v. S. E. Rykoff & Co., 634 F.2d 446 (9th Cir. 1980) (factors to consider in awarding attorneys’ fees)