Licci v. Lebanese Canadian Bank, SAL
15-1580
| 2d Cir. | Aug 24, 2016Background
- Plaintiffs are numerous victims/plaintiff estates who sued Lebanese Canadian Bank (LCB) under the Antiterrorism Act (ATA) and Israeli state law claims for alleged support of terrorism.
- District Court dismissed the ATA claims on collateral estoppel grounds and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the Israeli state-law claims after dismissing the federal claims.
- Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their ATA and Israeli state-law claims to the Second Circuit.
- Central factual and procedural history is drawn from earlier litigation in the D.C. courts (Kaplan actions) that addressed whether certain banking conduct supported terrorist organizations.
- The Second Circuit reviewed the collateral-estoppel dismissal de novo and considered whether the prior D.C. judgment was final for preclusion purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Plaintiffs’ ATA claims are barred by collateral estoppel | Kaplan decision was non-final or inapplicable; thus Plaintiffs can relitigate ATA issues | The D.C. Kaplan decision is a final judgment on the same issues and precludes relitigation | Collateral estoppel applies; ATA claims barred |
| Whether the D.C. Kaplan decision is "final" for preclusion | Kaplan v. Hezbollah and Kaplan v. Central Bank should be treated together; judgment here not final | Kaplan v. Central Bank is a final judgment for preclusion purposes | Kaplan v. Central Bank is final; preclusion criteria satisfied |
| Whether the district court abused discretion by declining supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims | Plaintiffs argued for retention of Israeli state-law claims | LCB argued dismissal of federal claims warranted dismissal of supplemental state-law claims | District Court did not abuse its discretion in declining supplemental jurisdiction; state-law claims dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnston v. Arbitrium (Cayman Is.) Handels AG, 198 F.3d 342 (2d Cir. 1999) (standard of review for collateral estoppel dismissal)
- Wyly v. Weiss, 697 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 2012) (elements required for collateral estoppel)
- Lummus Co. v. Commonwealth Oil Ref. Co., 297 F.2d 80 (2d Cir. 1961) (finality for collateral estoppel purposes)
- Kaplan v. Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 961 F. Supp. 2d 185 (D.D.C. 2013) (prior D.C. judgment relied on for preclusion)
- Lundy v. Catholic Health Sys. of Long Island, Inc., 711 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2013) (standards governing exercise of supplemental jurisdiction)