770 F.3d 993 (2nd Cir. 2014), 12-0075, Calderon-Cardona v. Bank of New York Mellon
|Citation:||770 F.3d 993|
|Opinion Judge:||Hall, Circuit Judge :|
|Party Name:||RUTH CALDERON-CARDONA; RUTH CALDERON-CARDONA, in her capacity as personal representative of THE ESTATE OF ELADIA CARDONA-ROSARIO; Luz CALDERON-CARDONA; LOUIS CALDERONCARDONA; GLORIA CALDERON-CARDONA; JOSE RAUL CALDERON-CARDONA; ANA DELIA CALDERON-CARDONA; HILDA CALDERON-CARDONA; SALVADOR CALDERON-MARTINEZ; ANGEL CALDERONGUZMAN in his capacity as pe|
|Attorney:||FOR APPELLANTS: ROBERT J. TOLCHIN and MEIR KATZ, The Berkman Law Office, LLC, Brooklyn, New York, for Petitioners-Appellants. FOR APPELLEES: HOWARD B. LEVI and J. KELLY NEVLING, JR., Levi Lubarsky & Feigenbaum LLP, New York, New York, for JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Bank of New York Mellon Trus...|
|Judge Panel:||Before: HALL, LYNCH, AND CARNEY, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||October 23, 2014|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|
Petitioners, family members of victims of state sponsored terrorism, sought enforcement of their 2010 judgment obtained against North Korea by attaching the blocked assets of that state under section 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (TRIA), 28 U.S.C. 1610 note, and sections 1610(f)(1) and 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. 1610(f)(1) and 1610(g).... (see full summary)
Argued: February 11, 2013.
This case presents the question whether recovery under § 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 or § § 1610(f)(1) and 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act is possible where the property to be attached consists of blocked electronic funds transfers and the nation whose assets are being sought was not a designated state sponsor of terrorism at the time the judgment to be enforced was issued. Because attachment is not proper under § 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 or § 1610(f)(1) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act but additional discovery is required to determine whether the electronic funds transfers are the property of North Korea under § 1610(g) , the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Cote, J.) is hereby AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, and REMANDED.
Before us on appeal is a matter of first impression regarding the interpretation of § 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1610 note) (" TRIA" ) and § § 1610(f)(1) and 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (" FSIA" ) (codified at 28 U.S.C.). The petitioners are family members of victims of state sponsored terrorism. They seek to enforce their 2010 judgment (" the underlying judgment" ) obtained against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (" North Korea" ) by attaching the blocked assets of that state pursuant to TRIA § 201 and FSIA § § 1610(f)(1) and 1610(g). In particular, the petitioners seek to satisfy their judgments from electronic fund transfers (" EFTs" ) blocked in United States banks pursuant to the sanctions regimes imposed
upon North Korea by the United States government.1 The banks at which the EFTs are blocked oppose turning over the value of the EFTs to petitioners. The questions raised on appeal are whether petitioners are precluded from recovering because North Korea's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism was revoked in 2008, prior to the entry of the underlying judgment, and whether the EFTs sought to be attached are the property of North Korea, or of its agencies or instrumentalities, and therefore properly subject to execution to satisfy a judgment against North Korea.
A. Underlying Judgment
The petitioners are family members and estate representatives of two American citizens, Carmelo Calderon-Molina and Pablo Tirado-Ayala, who were victims of a terrorist attack in Israel on May 30, 1972. The attack was carried out by terrorists affiliated with the Japanese Red Army and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
On March 28, 2008, the victims' families and estate representatives commenced suit against North Korea and the North Korean Cabinet General Intelligence Bureau in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico under FSIA § 1605A, alleging that North Korea and the North Korean Cabinet General Intelligence Bureau " provided material support to the terrorists by supplying them with the armaments used to carry out the attack." Calderon-Cardona v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 867 F.Supp.2d 389, 392 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). When the suit was filed, North Korea was designated by the United
States Department of State (" State Department" ) as a state sponsor of terrorism under § 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979. North Korea and the North Korean Cabinet General Intelligence Bureau defaulted, and on August 5, 2010, the district court entered judgment for the petitioners awarding compensatory damages in the amount of $78 million and punitive damages in the amount of $300 million. See Calderon-Cardona v. Democratic People's Republic of Korea, 723 F.Supp.2d 441, 460-85 (D.P.R. 2010). The petitioners' judgment remains unsatisfied.
By order dated October 11, 2008, while petitioners' § 1605A action was pending, the State Department rescinded North Korea's status as a state sponsor of terrorism. Rescission of Determination Regarding North Korea, 73 Fed. Reg. 63,540 (Oct. 24, 2008). Then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did so in accordance with a Presidential Report issued on June 26, 2008, which was the end-result of negotiations with North Korea regarding its development of nuclear technologies.
B. Judgment Collection and Proceedings Before the District Court
In an attempt to collect on the judgment, petitioners registered it in the Southern District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1963 on October 8, 2010. Seeking to locate North Korean assets, the petitioners then served a subpoena on the Office of Foreign Assets Control (" OFAC" ) of the Department of the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP