Sea Search Armada v. Republic of Colombia
821 F. Supp. 2d 268
D.D.C.2011Background
- SSA sued Colombia in 2010 for breach of contract, conversion, and recognition/enforcement of a foreign judgment.
- San Jose wreck located off the Colombian Continental Shelf; SSA initially agreed to 35% share, Colombia later claimed all rights and enacted a law expropriating SSA’s rights in 1984.
- Colombia’s 1984 law purported to extinguish SSA’s rights; SSA alleged breach by denial of salvage permissions.
- Colombia Supreme Court later ruled in 2007 that SSA and Colombia owned the treasure in equal shares; Colombian court rulings followed, including a 1994 constitutionality finding and a 2007 final disposition.
- District of Columbia court dismissed the case, ruling the breach and conversion claims were time-barred and Count III (UFMJRA recognition) failed as not a money judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the breach-of-contract claim time-barred? | SSA argues accrual deferred by discovery rules. | Colombia contends accrual in 1984, with timely filing required by 1987. | Time-barred; filed after limitations. |
| Is the conversion claim time-barred? | SSA relies on later events after 1984 for accrual. | Conversion accrued in 1984; limitations expired by 1987. | Time-barred; filed in 2010. |
| Can the Colombia Supreme Court decision be recognized as a money judgment under the UFMJRA? | Decision constitutes a monetary judgment entitling SSA to 50% of treasure value. | The ruling does not specify a sum of money; not a money judgment. | Not a money judgment; Count III dismissed. |
| Did the court need to address immunity/service given the above rulings? | — | — | Court did not reach those issues; dismissal on other grounds suffices. |
Key Cases Cited
- Leatherman v. Tarrant Cty. Narcotics & Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163 (1993) (standards for pleading on Rule 12(b)(6))
- Dura Pharm., Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336 (2005) (no detailed factual allegations required; plausibility standard)
- Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) (plausibility standard; factual content required)
- TermoRio S.A. v. Electrificadora del Atlantico S.A., 421 F. Supp. 2d 87 (D.D.C. 2006) (equitable tolling not favored; timely filing requirement)
- Continental Transfert Technique Ltd. v. Federal Government of Nigeria, 697 F. Supp. 2d 46 (D.D.C. 2010) (foreign judgment enforcement standards)
- Gilson v. Rep. of Ireland, 682 F.2d 1022 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (local-law limitations in FSIA actions)
- Malewicz v. City of Amsterdam, 571 F. Supp. 2d 322 (D.D.C. 2007) (accrual and limitations in similar contexts)
- Murray v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., 953 A.2d 308 (D.C. 2008) (DC limitations and accrual considerations)