Federal Appellate Court Allows Hungarian Holocaust Survivors to Pursue Claims

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (2) ◽  
pp. 404-407
Keyword(s):  
Holocaust Survivors ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens ◽  
Jewish Survivors

On December 28, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held in Simon v. Republic of Hungary that fourteen Hungarian Jewish survivors of the Holocaust could continue to pursue their claims against Hungary and its state-owned railway. In a 2–1 decision authored by Judge Millett, the D.C. Circuit reversed the district court decision that had dismissed the case on two alternative grounds—the principle of international comity and the doctrine of forum non conveniens. The D.C. Circuit thus remanded the long-running case for further proceedings.

United States: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Decision in Re: Union Carbide Corporation Gas Plant Disaster At Bhopal, India in December 1984

1987 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 1008-1020
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
District Court ◽  
Union Carbide Corporation ◽  
Union Carbide ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Gas Leak ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens

This decision follows an appeal of the May 1986 District Court decision [25 I.L.M. 771 (1986)] in which 145 consolidated personal injury claims were dismissed on the basis of forum non conveniens. The District Court conditioned its decision By requiring Union Carbide to consent to the jurisdiction of the Indian courts, to agree to any judgment of the Indian courts and to abide by U.S. pretrial procedural rules. The Court of Appeals addressed each of these conditions and modified the District Court's order. In the appeal, attorneys for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas leak challenged the decision to move the hearings to India, while Union Carbide contended that it is unfair to hold Union Carbide to different standards for discovery of evidence than India would have to follow in the Indian courts.

United States: Supreme Court Decision in Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale et al. V. United States District Court for The Southern District of IOWA (Hague Evidence Convention; Extraterritorial Discovery in U.S. Courts)

1987 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 1021-1044
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Union Carbide ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Southern District ◽  
Gas Leak ◽  
Forum Non Conveniens

This decision follows an appeal of the May 1986 District Court decision [25 I.L.M. 771 (1986)] in which 145 consolidated personal injury claims were dismissed on the basis of forum non conveniens. The District Court conditioned its decision By requiring Union Carbide to consent to the jurisdiction of the Indian courts, to agree to any judgment of the Indian courts and to abide by U.S. pretrial procedural rules. The Court of Appeals addressed each of these conditions and modified the District Court's order. In the appeal, attorneys for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas leak challenged the decision to move the hearings to India, while Union Carbide contended that it is unfair to hold Union Carbide to different standards for discovery of evidence than India would have to follow in the Indian courts.

Medicaid & Medicare: D.C. Appellate Court Denies Claim for Medicare Reimbursement of GME Cost

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-205
Author(s):  
choeffel Amy
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
District Court ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Summary Judgment

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld, in Presbyterian Medical Center of the University of Pennsylvania Health System v. Shalala, 170 F.3d 1146 (D.C. Cir. 1999), a federal district court ruling granting summary judgment to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) in a case in which Presbyterian Medical Center (PMC) challenged Medicare's requirement of contemporaneous documentation of $828,000 in graduate medical education (GME) expenses prior to increasing reimbursement amounts. DHHS Secretary Donna Shalala denied PMC's request for reimbursement for increased GME costs. The appellants then brought suit in federal court challenging the legality of an interpretative rule that requires requested increases in reimbursement to be supported by contemporaneous documentation. PMC also alleged that an error was made in the administrative proceedings to prejudice its claims because Aetna, the hospital's fiscal intermediary, failed to provide the hospital with a written report explaining why it was denied the GME reimbursement.

Zedan v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 828-830
Author(s):  
Edward M. Leigh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Telephone Call ◽  
District Court ◽  
Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
American Citizen

Plaintiff Zedan, an American citizen, brought suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for breach of a contract guaranteeing wages and profits. While performance under the contract occurred in Saudi Arabia, plaintiff alleged that the jurisdictional requirements under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (28 U.S.C. §§1330, 1602-1611 (1982)) (FSIA) were satisfied by a recruitment call in California from a representative of the royal overseer of a private Saudi company. The district court granted the Saudi motion to dismiss. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (per Silberman, J.) unanimously affirmed and held: (1) that the telephone call did not have the requisite substantiality of contact with the United States; (2) that it was not sufficient to form the basis of a cause of action; and (3) that the alleged breach did not have sufficient direct effect in the United States to satisfy the exceptions to immunity under the FSIA.

Collegial Courts: Panel Decision-Making and the U.S. Courts of Appeals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela C. Corley ◽  
Wendy L. Martinek
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Appeals Process ◽  
Almost All ◽  
The U.S

The three-judge panel mechanism by which the courts of appeals process almost all (though not quite all) of their cases affords scholars unique opportunities to explore how appellate court decision-making may transcend being merely the sum of its parts. Specifically, court of appeals judges pursue their decision-making responsibilities as part of a collegial group, and thus it is important to understand how being a member of a multimember court influences their behavior.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015

2021 ◽  
pp. 191-206
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 14 tells the story of how Jim Obergefell, whose husband John Arthur was dying, sued the state of Ohio to try to force the state to list Obergefell as the husband on Arthur’s death certificate. Ohio was one of many states whose constitution explicitly rejected recognition of same-sex marriages, wherever they were originally celebrated. Obergefell won in federal district court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals consolidated his case with DeBoer v. Snyder from Michigan and cases from two other states, and overturned them all. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision of 2015 made marriage equality the law of the U.S. After the Obergefell victory, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse were legally married in Michigan and then cross-adopted their children.

US Court of Appeals Decision regarding Armstrong v. Kline: The 180 Day Rule

1981 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 266-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet F. Stotland ◽  
Ellen Mancuso
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Due Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
District Court ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Pennsylvania Department Of Education

On June 21, 1979, Judge Clarence C. Newcomer, of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, issued his decision and Order in the case of Armstrong v. Kline. Judge Newcomer held that the undisputed policy and practice of the Pennsylvania Department of Education of refusing to provide or fund the provision of a program of special education and related services in excess of 180 days per year to any handicapped student was in violation of Public Law 94-142. Also held to be in violation of the law was the Department's companion policy of instructing all hearing officers who preside at special education due process hearings that they were without the power to order or approve any educational programs exceeding 180 days per year. On July 15, 1980, the Appellate Court upheld the District Court in three separate opinions. This article describes the decision of the District Court, explains how the reasoning of the Appellate Court differs, and points out some of the implications of the Appellate Court's holding.

scholarly journals Commonalities and Peculiarities of the Return to Life of Holocaust Survivors in their Home Countries: The Dutch and Greek Cases in Context

HISTOREIN ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Michman
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Holocaust Survivors ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
Jewish Survivors ◽  
Second World ◽  
Return Process

This article provides a survey of the main characteristics of the return process of Jewish survivors of the Holocaust to their home countries in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, with the goal to contextualise and compare the return to the Netherlands and Greece.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document