Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran
879 F. Supp. 2d 44
D.D.C.2012Background
- This is a FSIA §1605A state-sponsored terrorism case arising from the 1984 assassination of General Gholam Ali Oveissi in Paris, France.
- Plaintiff Amir Reza Oveissi is General Oveissi’s grandson seeking monetary damages from Iran and MOIS.
- Defendants are Iran and its Ministry of Information and Security (MOIS).
- There was a prior Oveissi litigation (liability and damages) resulting in a $7.5 million solatium award and liability finding.
- Plaintiff initially secured a default against defendants after they failed to respond within 60 days.
- The court adopts findings from the prior Oveissi litigation and confirms damages under the updated FSIA framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject matter jurisdiction under §1605A(a) | Oveissi satisfies money damages against a foreign state for extrajudicial killing. | Immunity may shield Iran/MOIS absent waiver conditions. | Original jurisdiction exists under §1605A(a). |
| Waiver of sovereign immunity under §1605A(a)(2) | Iran designated as a state sponsor since 1984 and plaintiff is a U.S. citizen; no arbitration required. | Immunity applies absent waiver grounds. | Sovereign immunity waived; defendants liable. |
| Liability under §1605A(c) for extrajudicial killing and material support | Iran/MOIS provided material support and directed Hezbollah to commit the assassination. | Liability should be confined by more limited theories of recovery. | Liable for extrajudicial killing and material support via agency/aid relations. |
| Damages under §1605A(c) and related §1605A(d) | Solatium, punitive damages, and other compensatory awards are appropriate; property loss may be recoverable. | Limitations on damages; challenge to certain categories (e.g., property loss). | Solatium confirmed at $7.5 million; punitive damages awarded at $300 million; prejudgment interest and property loss denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rimkus v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 750 F. Supp. 2d 163 (D.D.C. 2010) (courts must evaluate evidence before default judgment and not rely solely on pleadings)
- Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52 (D.D.C. 2010) (use evidence and established standards to define theories of liability)
- Murphy v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 740 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2010) (court may take judicial notice of related proceedings and records)
- Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 498 F. Supp. 2d 268 (D.D.C. 2007) (earlier liability/damages findings adopted by later decision)
- Beer v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 789 F. Supp. 2d 14 (D.D.C. 2011) (foreign sovereigns and large punitive damages framework under FSIA)
- Wultz v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 864 F. Supp. 2d 24 (D.D.C. 2012) ( FSIA punitive damages in terrorism cases; deterrence rationale)
- Acosta v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, 574 F. Supp. 2d 15 (D.D.C. 2008) (punitive damages framework and Restatement-based analysis)
- Gates v. Syrian Arab Republic, 580 F. Supp. 2d 53 (D.D.C. 2008) (punitive damages in foreign-state terrorism context)