662 F. App'x 673
11th Cir.2016Background
- Colombian plaintiffs (legal representatives/wrongful-death beneficiaries of 34 decedents) sued Drummond Co., two subsidiaries, and two individual executives alleging they financed the AUC Northern Bloc and thus are liable for extrajudicial killings under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), the Torture Victims Protection Act (TVPA), and Colombian wrongful-death law.
- This action is the fourth related suit; earlier suits (Romero, Baloco, Doe) produced extensive record development and dispositive rulings, including a jury verdict for defendants in Romero and later appellate decisions limiting ATS/TVPA claims.
- After Kiobel (presumption against extraterritoriality) and this Court’s decisions in Baloco II and Doe, the district court ordered show-cause briefing and then dismissed all claims with prejudice, citing those precedents but giving no detailed reasoning.
- On appeal the Eleventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of corporate TVPA claims, reversed the ATS dismissals as improperly entered with prejudice (jurisdictional and must be without prejudice), vacated the district court’s dismissal of the individual-defendant TVPA claims and the Colombian wrongful-death claims, and remanded for the district court to either permit those claims to proceed or to explain and reenter any dismissal.
- The Court declined to permit jurisdictional discovery because plaintiffs had long-standing access to evidence and failed to plead sufficient U.S.-based conduct to overcome Kiobel’s presumption; it also held the district court could not treat the post-stay dismissal as a merits ruling on summary-judgment grounds without giving parties notice and opportunity to present evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ATS claims invoke federal jurisdiction despite Kiobel presumption | Plaintiffs contend their complaint alleges sufficient U.S.-focused conduct to "touch and concern" the U.S. | Defendants say allegations mirror Doe/Baloco and fail to overcome extraterritoriality presumption | ATS claims dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; dismissal must be without prejudice (reversed as to prejudice) |
| Whether plaintiffs were entitled to jurisdictional discovery on U.S.-based conduct | Plaintiffs sought discovery to develop U.S.-based factual predicate | Defendants argued plaintiffs already had years of access to evidence from related cases and pleadings were deficient | District court did not abuse discretion in denying discovery given plaintiffs’ prior access and sparse U.S. allegations |
| Whether TVPA claims against individual executives survive pleading stage | Plaintiffs argue they adequately pled indirect (aiding-and-abetting/command) liability against executives | Defendants rely on Doe’s analysis that similar facts were insufficient and argue failure to state a TVPA claim | Dismissal of TVPA claims against individuals vacated; remanded for district court to decide on the merits or allow plaintiffs to proceed (district court failed to articulate basis) |
| Whether Colombian wrongful-death claims are barred (statute of limitations or other grounds) | Plaintiffs argue Colombian limitations and equitable tolling apply; diversity jurisdiction supports state-law claims | Defendants contend Alabama statute of limitations bars the claims | Dismissal vacated and remanded for district court to address the statute-of-limitations and tolling issues or otherwise articulate its reasoning |
Key Cases Cited
- Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S. Ct. 1659 (2013) (presumption against extraterritoriality limits ATS jurisdiction)
- Doe v. Drummond Co., 782 F.3d 576 (11th Cir. 2015) (articulates domestic-conduct minimum factual predicate for ATS and limits on indirect TVPA liability)
- Baloco v. Drummond Co., 767 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2014) (ATS extraterritoriality and preclusion issues in related litigation)
- Romero v. Drummond Co., 552 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2008) (earlier trial and appellate history in related suits)
- Mohammad v. Palestinian Authority, 132 S. Ct. 1702 (2012) (TVPA does not authorize suit against corporations)
- Butler v. Sukhoi Co., 579 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2009) (limits on jurisdictional discovery where complaint is legally insufficient)
- Stalley ex rel. United States v. Orlando Reg'l Healthcare Sys., 524 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2008) (dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction must be without prejudice)
- Palmyra Park Hosp., Inc. v. Phoebe Putney Mem'l Hosp., 604 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2010) (appellate court may decline to affirm where district court should first provide reasoned explanation)