288 F. Supp. 3d 117
D.C. Cir.2018Background
- Plaintiffs (Jacques Miango, Matala Kayaya, Ouwo Likutu, and Miango’s wife Michelle) allege they were assaulted and had property stolen by members of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) President’s entourage during a protest in Washington, D.C. on August 6, 2014.
- Plaintiffs sued the DRC and seven individual DRC officials under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) and common-law tort theories (battery, conversion, loss of consortium, etc.). Several other defendants were dismissed earlier; seven DRC-related defendants failed to answer and default was entered.
- The Court required satisfactory evidentiary proof under FSIA §1608(e) before entering default judgment; plaintiffs submitted affidavits, State Department records showing the security personnel were part of the President’s entourage, medical and billing records, and receipts/affidavits valuing stolen items.
- The Court found sufficient evidence that the individuals who attacked plaintiffs were acting within the scope of their employment for the DRC (respondeat superior), so the FSIA tort exception (28 U.S.C. §1605(a)(5)) waived sovereign immunity.
- The Court concluded defendants’ conduct would give rise to liability for battery, conversion, and loss of consortium under applicable law (D.C. law for battery/conversion; Maryland law for loss of consortium) and granted default judgment.
- The Court awarded compensatory damages (medical, pain and suffering, lost property, and loss-of-consortium noneconomic damages subject to Maryland’s cap), totaling $562,660.06 across the plaintiffs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FSIA waives immunity under the noncommercial tort exception | Plaintiffs: attackers were DRC security agents acting within scope of employment; §1605(a)(5) applies | Defendants: defaulted (no responsive argument), but sovereign immunity defense implicit | Held: FSIA §1605(a)(5) applies; court has jurisdiction because attackers were in the President’s entourage and acted within scope of employment |
| Whether plaintiffs proved tort liability (battery, conversion, loss of consortium) sufficient for default judgment | Plaintiffs: provided detailed affidavits and documentary evidence of assault, injuries, and stolen property | Defendants: defaulted/no contest | Held: plaintiffs’ affidavits and records are satisfactory; defendants’ acts would give rise to liability for battery, conversion, and derivative loss of consortium |
| Proper choice of law for tort claims and derivative claims | Plaintiffs: Maryland law applies because plaintiffs are domiciled there | Defendants: defaulted; forum choice-of-law considerations relevant | Held: D.C. law applies to primary tort claims (where injury occurred); Maryland law applies to loss of consortium (domicile rule); Maryland noneconomic damages cap applies |
| Damages — sufficiency of proof and amounts requested | Plaintiffs: seek medical costs, pain and suffering, loss of consortium, and value of stolen property (specific amounts alleged) | Defendants: defaulted; court must independently assess reasonableness under FSIA default standard | Held: court reduced and adjusted requested amounts where unsupported or double-counted; awarded specific sums: Miango $360,070.06; Kayaya $100,700.00; Likutu $101,890.00 (total $562,660.06) |
Key Cases Cited
- Miango v. Democratic Republic of the Congo, 243 F. Supp. 3d 113 (D.D.C. 2017) (prior memorandum opinion in this litigation)
- Han Kim v. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, 774 F.3d 1044 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (FSIA default-judgment evidence requirement under §1608(e))
- Hill v. Republic of Iraq, 328 F.3d 680 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (default-judgment damages standard under FSIA)
- Reed v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 845 F. Supp. 2d 204 (D.D.C. 2012) (courts must scrutinize FSIA default allegations; cannot accept unsupported allegations)
- First National City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior de Cuba, 462 U.S. 611 (U.S. 1983) (FSIA §1606 pass-through to applicable law)
- Weinberg v. Johnson, 518 A.2d 985 (D.C. 1986) (test for respondeat superior under D.C. law)
- Evans-Reid v. District of Columbia, 930 A.2d 930 (D.C. 2007) (definition of battery under D.C. law)
- Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980) (addressing FSIA tort exceptions and discretionary-function in context of state-directed illegal acts)
- Bluth v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 203 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2016) (economic and noneconomic damages principles under FSIA)