LEE v. IRAN
1:19-cv-00830
D.D.C.May 19, 2025Background
- This case involves claims by Nicholas Gene Koulchar and Preston Charles Kaplan, both U.S. servicemembers wounded in Iraq by explosively formed penetrator (EFP) attacks, who allege that Iran materially supported the insurgents responsible.
- Over 352 plaintiffs—service members, contractors, estates, and family members—file claims in relation to 99 attacks, with Iran found liable via default judgment for multiple attacks, including those injuring Koulchar and Kaplan.
- This opinion addresses the court's adoption of a Special Master’s recommendations regarding compensatory damages for Koulchar and Kaplan under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).
- The court applies a modified damages framework, reflecting the severe and distinctive injuries suffered by servicemembers from EFP attacks under established precedents.
- Both Plaintiffs provided expert reports to substantiate their claims for both non-economic (pain and suffering) and economic (lost wages, benefits) damages; the court finds these reports reasonable.
- The court confirms its subject-matter jurisdiction, as both attacks involved extrajudicial killings, satisfying FSIA requirements according to submitted evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Iran's Liability for Injuries | Iran materially supported insurgents responsible for EFP attacks, resulting in severe injuries. | No appearance (default judgment); Iran did not contest. | Iran is liable under FSIA for both plaintiffs' injuries. |
| Non-Economic Damages Framework | Enhanced damages appropriate for aggravating EFP injuries (severe physical/psychological harm). | No appearance; damages not contested. | Modified framework for EFP injuries adopted; $20M for Koulchar, $17M for Kaplan. |
| Economic Damages Calculation | Economic expert's reports accurately estimate lost wages, benefits. | No appearance; calculations not contested. | Economic damages awarded per expert reports: $4,393,725 (Koulchar), $2,598,202 (Kaplan). |
| Jurisdiction under FSIA | Attacks involved extrajudicial killings, permitting jurisdiction. | Jurisdiction could be questioned under recent Circuit opinions where no deaths occurred. | Jurisdiction upheld; evidence supports extrajudicial killings in attacks. |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 466 F. Supp. 2d 229 (D.D.C. 2006) (outlining damages framework for terrorist victims under FSIA)
- Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52 (D.D.C. 2010) (setting ranges for non-economic damages in terrorism cases)
- Fritz v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 324 F. Supp. 3d 54 (D.D.C. 2018) (addressing damages process and expert economic testimony in FSIA terrorism cases)
- Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 515 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2007) (application of state law compensatory damages under FSIA)
- Murphy v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 740 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2010) (upholding flexibility and enhancement in FSIA damages for terrorism victims)