Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23040
| D.D.C. | 2011Background
- Oveissi sues Iran and MOIS under FSIA §1605(a)(7) for assassination of his grandfather, Gholam Oveissi.
- Court previously held Iran through MOIS funded and controlled Islamic Jihad and found liability on multiple issues (Oveissi III).
- Damages phase applies French law of damages (réparation intégrale) and the French concept of dommage par ricochet to FSIA claims.
- Plaintiff presented evidence in three categories: relationship with grandfather, Iranian properties held by grandfather, and potential economic losses due to the assassination.
- Court held a damages hearing, received supplemental briefs, and invited further evidence on economic loss causation; it then ruled on solatium and economic damages.
- Court concluded plaintiff cannot recover property losses in Iran because the 1979 flight and subsequent events—not the 1984 murder—caused the losses, and FSIA limits survival-type property claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| What damages are recoverable under FSIA with French law? | Oveissi seeks solatium and economic loss under French damages. | FSIA and French law limit recoveries; punitive damages unavailable. | Court allows solatium and economic-loss-style damages within limits; awards solatium but denies property-based economic losses. |
| Appropriate solatium amount given relationship and circumstances | Relationship close enough to warrant higher than Heiser baseline. | Heiser baseline with limited enhancements; avoid excessive uplift. | Starting point $5 million (parent-child level); 50% enhancement approved for circumstances, totaling $7.5 million. |
| Whether factors like sudden death and permanent loss justify enhancement | Sudden, traumatic death and permanent life changes support higher award. | Enhancements should be carefully bounded, not exceed precedent. | Enhancements warranted; Court grants a 50% uplift based on these factors. |
| Whether plaintiff may recover economic losses tied to Iran property | Assets in Iran would have been part of estate and benefit to heirs; damages may be recovered. | Losses occurred before death; no legal causation under FSIA; no survival claim for property. | Denied; legal causation and FSIA limits prevent recovery of property losses not caused by the murder. |
Key Cases Cited
- Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 466 F. Supp. 2d 229 (D.D.C. 2006) (framework for calculating FSIA solatium damages)
- Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52 (D.D.C. 2010) (adopts Heiser framework; discusses enhancements)
- Murphy v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 740 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2010) (solatium and pain-and-suffering guidance)
- Stethem v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 201 F. Supp. 2d 78 (D.D.C. 2002) (suddenness of death as a factor in solatium)
- Blais v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 459 F. Supp. 2d 40 (D.D.C. 2006) (guidance on enhancements for solatium)
- Rimkus v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 575 F. Supp. 2d 181 (D.D.C. 2008) (punitive damages generally unavailable against foreign states)
- Haim v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 425 F. Supp. 2d 56 (D.D.C. 2006) (factors for solatium enhancements)