Author Archives: hnklaw

As soldiers fight in Gaza, lawyers take on terror funding in court

“If you block the flow of the money, you can block the flow of the terrorism, and the only way to do so is by bringing legal actions against the terror organizations and their financial patrons.”

By Michael Starr in The Jerusalem Post

Approximately 70 US and Israeli victims of October 7 filed a lawsuit with a US federal court, seeking restitution from Iran as a sponsor of Gazan terrorist organizations in January. (photo credit: UNSPLASH/CLAIREANDERSON)

The IDF is fighting the Israel-Hamas war to release the hostages taken during the October 7 massacre, ensure that such a pogrom can never happen again, and secure justice against the perpetrators. The physical battlefield is not the only arena in which these objectives can be achieved – the courtroom is also a vital front in the war against terrorism.

“Israel is fighting this war on multiple fronts, not only against Hamas in Gaza but in the ‘war of narratives’ and the legal arena as well,” Human Rights lawyer and International Legal Forum CEO Arsen Ostrovsky said.

“It is imperative that we are unwavering in using every legal tool at our disposal to change the paradigm in pursuing justice by holding not only the perpetrators of October 7 accountable but all those who supported, enabled, and funded this massacre and ongoing captivity of hostages.”

Ostrovsky and his coalition of thousands of attorneys are among the many actors who have taken the fight to the courtroom. Since October 7, NGOs, activists, survivors, and the families of victims have sought justice and the prevention of future horrors, by filing lawsuits against those who facilitated Hamas’s crimes.

At the end of January, 67 US and Israeli October 7 victims filed a lawsuit with a US federal court, seeking restitution from Iran as a sponsor of Gazan terrorist organizations. On February 14, the Hostage and Missing Families Forum filed a complaint with the International Criminal Court (ICC) against Hamas for genocide, kidnapping, sexual violence, and torture.

Additionally, on behalf of family members and victims, the National Jewish Advocacy Center (NJAC) and several firms, on February 23, sued the Associated Press (AP) before the Southern District of Florida for allegedly knowingly supporting terrorism by purchasing photos from Hamas-linked journalists, including Gazans who participated in the October 7 massacre.

“If you block the flow of the money, you can block the flow of the terrorism”
NJAC also worked with ILF and attorneys David Schoen and Ben Schlager to file a suit in Alabama on behalf of October 7 victims against cryptocurrency platform Binance, for facilitating Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) funding and financial transactions.

Representatives of the parents of Shani Louk, May Naim, Lotan Abir, Guy Gabriel Levi, and Shalev Madmoni filed a lawsuit in the Jerusalem District Court on February 28 against AP and Reuters for their employment of photo-journalists who accompanied the terrorists on their pogrom.

In another suit on behalf of victims, Schoen, attorneys David Finger and Jason Torchinsky, NJAC, and ILF launched a March 10 Delaware lawsuit against the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) USA National Committee, for alleged support of Hamas.

The Shurat Hadin-Israel Law Center also filed a lawsuit in Jerusalem, on March 11, on behalf of 124 family members of October 7 victims, against the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas. Shurat Hadin founder Nitsana Darshan-Leitner said the barrage of such lawsuits can serve to cut off the financial oxygen that terrorist organizations need to breathe.

“If you block the flow of the money, you can block the flow of the terrorism, and the only way to do so is by bringing legal actions against the terror organizations and their financial patrons,” said Darshan-Leitner.

“The players in this fight are the terror victims who were harmed as a result of terror attacks. They are seizing billions of dollars of terror funds, and putting liens on hundreds of millions of dollars of terror assets. This fight grants the terror victims a way to fight back. Money cannot bring back life, but money gives a measure of closure, a measure of justice to the terror victims. In Shurat HaDin we’ve been fighting terror funding for two decades and we’ll continue to do it until we dry all the sources for their money.”

As noted by Darshan-Leitner, such legal efforts on behalf of terrorism victims are part of a long war against terrorists.

Richard Heideman has been fighting on the frontlines of this battle for decades. Heideman hasn’t just served as ex-president of the American Zionist Movement and B’nai B’rith International and founding chairman of The Israel Forever Foundation, he is also senior counsel for the DC law firm, Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, PC. Over several decades, the firm has frequently been asked to represent the victims of terrorism.

“Terrorism didn’t begin with October 7 or the Second Intifada or September 11,” said Heideman.

He explained that there are two alternate but not competing paths when pursuing legal action and justice for terrorism victims: Action against states and action against non-state actors.

Normally, states do not fall under the jurisdiction of US courts, but under the terrorism exception in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, any country designated by the US State Department as a State Sponsor of Terrorism can be sued by American victims. The current list includes Syria, Iran, North Korea, and Cuba. Spouses, children, parents, and siblings of terror victims all have claims against these countries, said Heideman.

Libya used to be on the list but was removed in 2006 after a series of agreements with the United States and United Kingdom, which included settlements for litigation against it for support of terrorism.

Heideman also served as counsel for victims of the 1985 EgyptAir Flight 648 hijacking, after three Palestinian Abu Nidal terrorists seized the flight from Athens to Cairo, diverting it to Malta. They separated Americans, Israelis, Europeans, and Australians, putting them at the front of the plane. Sixty hostages, including an American, were killed during a shootout with Egyptian special forces. Heideman said that a surviving terrorist told him that he had received the weapons through a Libyan diplomat and that they had trained in the Beqaa Valley. Heideman worked on the suit against Libya and Syria.

That same year, terrorists simultaneously attacked the El Al ticket counters in Rome and Vienna. In Rome, Americans waiting at the Trans World Airlines (TWA) counter were killed. Heideman served as counsel to some of the American victims. He spoke to terrorists in prison, who gave affidavits stating that the attack was sponsored by Libya and that they had been trained by Syrian intelligence along with the flight 648 terror cell. As part of Libya’s claims settlement agreement that Heideman worked on, Libya, in 2008, settled with $1.5 billion, dispersed to victims of those attacks.

This demonstrates that while it may take decades of work, judgments against rogue states such as Syria can eventually yield fruit. Yet because victims and their families can’t wait decades for financial and emotional relief, Heideman said, in 2014 the US Congress created the United States Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund for American claimants to be awarded according to court judgments.

Lawyers expect October 7 cases to go on for years
THE OTHER path for suing those supporting terrorist activities is through the Anti-Terrorism Act as amended by the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, allowing victims to sue NGOs, corporations, banks, charities, and foundations for material support in aiding and abetting terrorism. Heideman said that such cases can be difficult since they require proof of the use of funding in terrorism and prior knowledge that the funds would be used in such a capacity. Under the Alien Tort Statute, foreign citizens can bring lawsuits before American courts.

Heideman took part in legal action against Arab Bank in 2018 when it was accused of facilitating Hamas terrorist attacks by knowingly providing funds to Hamas through charities. The bank settled. Heidman said that one of the terrorists who received funds through Arab Bank was Tamer Rimawi, an alleged al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigades terrorist who murdered special-needs kindergarten teacher Esther Klieman in 2002. On behalf of her family, Heidman sued the PA, Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), and then Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. The case has gone on for years as the PA and PLO have contested jurisdiction, demanding the case be tried in Ramallah.

The slaughter of so many people on October 7 shocked Heideman, who visited the towns that had been attacked.

“Americans, Israelis, and the citizens of 42 other countries deserve to seek and obtain justice,” he said. “Our firm has been engaged to litigate against Iran and Syria for providing aid to Hamas.”

Heideman said that they had already consulted with experts who were willing to opine to the court that Hamas was sponsored by Iran – and had engaged a number of investigators to collect more information on material and funding support.

As a general rule, judges look to precedent in their decision-making, and if a court has accepted research findings, they can be applied to other cases. Heideman pointed to the case of Eitan and Naama Henkin who were murdered by a Hamas cell in 2015. He represented Eitan’s side of the family against Syria, Iran, and Iranian military and financial bodies for their support of the Hamas terrorist attack, resulting in a judgment in their favor.

Heideman is also co-counsel representing the mother, father, wife, children, and most of the siblings of Ari Fuld, who was murdered by a terrorist in 2018. The family is also suing Iran and Syria in a pending case.

“We anticipate we will be engaged for many years with the multiple legal actions we will be launching” over October 7, said Heideman.

The attorney said that his firm was looking at different non-state entities operating in Qatar and anticipated taking action over UNRWA-related issues. Heideman has been in contact with the families of soldiers killed or injured during IDF service. He had previously represented the family of American-born IDF soldier Max Steinberg, who was killed in Gaza during the 2014 Operation Protective Edge. They successfully sued Iran for providing material support to his killers, Heideman said.

Many avenues remain open to possibility in the war on terrorism, and in the legal realm, warriors like Ostrovsky, Darshan-Leitner, and Heideman are intent on pursuing victories.

“Israel is not only taken to task on the battlefield and the diplomatic front, Israel and the Jewish people face a continuing battle of public opinion and we hope that our quest for truth and justice will help not only pursue the guilty but protect the good name of Israel,” said Heideman.

“Justice, justice, you shall pursue (Deuteronomy 16:20),” he concluded.

The false, defamatory and bigoted lie that Israel is an apartheid state is part of a long-standing conspiratorial effort by countries of the Arab League, the Palestine Liberation Organization (a designated foreign terrorist organization), the Palestinian Authority and various governments and organizations to bring down Israel.

This conspiracy of defamation has received increasing support, including at the U.N., where an open-ended “Commission of Inquiry” recently stated that it will “investigate” apartheid charges against Israel. The rhetoric surrounding this announcement suggests that the Commission has already predetermined the outcome of its “investigation.”

These efforts are a bad faith attempt to turn public opinion against Israel, pit Jewish people against one another and embed defamatory lies in the minds of college students, community members, congresspeople, opinion-makers and influencers.

The following excerpts on the subject come from my most recent book, The Bloody Price of Freedom:

The demonizing accusation that Israel is an “apartheid” state is a spurious and baseless claim rooted in the very bigotry that the accusers purport to stand against. The comparison between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and apartheid in South Africa can be traced back to the “Zionism is a form of racism” resolution. U.N. Resolution 3379 stated that “the racist regime [Israel] in occupied Palestine and the racist regimes in Zimbabwe and South Africa have a common imperialist origin, forming a whole and having the same racist structure and being organically linked in their policy aimed at repression of the dignity and integrity of the human being.”

Thus, the notion that Zionism is racism and Israel is an apartheid state stem from an erroneous and malicious claim that is simply not based in fact, law or reality.

Israel has long been a haven for refugees of Jewish descent since its founding, and the Jewish people have been and remain committed to social justice, equality and due process of law for people from all walks of life. Israel has guaranteed freedom of access for peoples of all religions to all the holy places in Jerusalem and throughout Israel.

Clearly, as stated in paragraph 13 of Israel’s Declaration of Independence, it was pronounced and has been practiced throughout Israel’s history that the state would “be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex.”

This commitment is in sharp contrast to that of South Africa, which was under the dominion of the British empire. Neighboring Zimbabwe, then known as Southern Rhodesia, was under the control of Cecil Rhodes and the British South Africa Company. The colonization efforts in Zimbabwe and South Africa had nothing to do with religious freedom and everything to do with exploiting the people and natural resources of these lands.

In 1948, Afrikaner nationalism dominated South African politics, which introduced intentional and explicit racial segregation and white minority rule. The label of apartheid—an Afrikaans word meaning “separateness”—was coined by the National Party government itself in 1948 and remained the practice of the country until the National Party’s fall from power in 1994.

Under the apartheid regime in South Africa, black communities were completely banned and separated from every single aspect of white people’s society. The Group Areas Act of 1950 divided cities into “group areas,” restricting ownership and residences to specific population groups. The Bantu Homelands Citizens Act of 1970 stripped black South Africans of their state citizenship and authorized the forced removal of thousands of African people from their homes in the urban centers. The Native Building Workers Act of 1951 limited the places where black people were permitted to work, while the Native Labour Act of 1953 banned black Africans from organizing a strike. The Bantu Education Act of 1953 was geared towards educating black Africans exclusively for low-skill, low-wage jobs. The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949 and the Immorality Amendment Act of 1950 forbade marital and sexual relationships between white people and people of other races. The Prohibition of Political Interference Act of 1968 prohibited multiracial political parties.

By contrast, in Israel, there is an official policy of affirmative action administered by the Israeli government aimed at including minority Israelis in all aspects of public life. The Arabs who chose to stay in Israel during and following the 1948 war are Israeli citizens and are entitled to the rights granted to all citizens under the law. Arab Israelis serve in public institutions as ministers, Supreme Court judges, parliament members and governmental clerks. Furthermore, the former parties of the Joint List, an Arab-Israeli political bloc, hold seats in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. For the first time, in 2019, the Joint List endorsed a candidate to become prime minister of Israel.

It is also common to find many Arab Israelis holding only Israeli citizenship. Between 2011 and 2013, Professor Sammy Smooha, a researcher from Haifa University, conducted a poll among Arab Israelis, asking if they identify as Israeli or Palestinian. More than 20% responded “Israeli” or “Israeli-Palestinian.” Furthermore, according to his findings, when Arab-Israeli participants were asked if they would move to a Palestinian state if it is formed, 65– 77% percent of them replied that they would not.

A walk through the streets, shopping malls and hospitals of Israel will permit one to see and appreciate the integrated society that exists within all of Israel. People of all religions, all races and all beliefs are treated with respect in all public places; have access to all religious places; are protected in their right of prayer and assembly; have full access to healthcare treatment without regard to their race, religion, sexual orientation or beliefs; and enjoy freedoms not known anywhere else in the Middle East.

Where South Africa intended to and did impose a segregationist regime and called it apartheid, the allegation that Israel is similarly an apartheid state originated not from fact or from governmental policy but from Israel’s enemies as an intentional distortion of her commitment to building a wholesome society where diversity is cherished and rights are protected by the rule of law. Applying the moniker of apartheid to Israel today is another example of an antisemitic double standard applied exclusively to the Jewish state and ignores much greater injustices suffered by minority ethnic and religious groups around the world.

To put it bluntly, the attempt to equate Israel with South Africa is defamatory and disingenuous. Moreover, calling Israel an apartheid state under these circumstances does great injustice to Israel’s vibrant democracy and further disrespects the real and genuine struggle against the racism of the apartheid regime in South Africa. Moreover, the accusers against Israel who are in the Palestinian territories are obligated to look at their own leadership, and to look inward, as they essentially call for the future Palestinian state to be judenrein—free of Jews.

Who is it that is practicing apartheid?

Originally published by Richard D. Heideman in JNS

Richard D. Heideman is Senior Counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, PC, the Washington D.C. law firm representing American Victims of Terror. He is also Chairman of the Israel Forever Foundation, Honorary President of B’nai B’rith International and the Immediate Past President of the American Zionist Movement. The views expressed in this article and in his latest book The Bloody Price of Freedom (Gefen, Jerusalem/New York) are his own and not attributable to any organization.

Accordingly, payments for goods or services from and to parties that are not under sanctions are being held in transfer for weeks.

Sanctions have long been used by the United States, the EU and the United Nations to target the wrongdoings of dangerous regimes such as Libya, Iran and Syria; and have indeed had an enormous impact on those terror-sponsoring states. The sanctions imposed on these countries and their relevant actors remain important tools in seeking to deter their heinous activities.

In response to the ongoing war in Ukraine, both the US and EU have assembled new and broad sanctions policies targeting Russia, Belarus and those who are perceived to have influence on, or connections to, the Russian administration. But it is necessary to ask whether these sanctions are being applied properly.

The new sanctions being applied by the Biden administration go beyond Russia’s energy supply and governmental activities and are more extensive than the Obama administration’s 2014 executive order targeting investment and trade at the time of and relating to Russia’s activities regarding Crimea. Businesses today appear to be in a fog when determining whether they can conduct a particular transaction with a person or entity from Russia or Belarus, even one not on the sanctions list.

Due to the broad scale of the new regulations, many corporations and their leaders find themselves in a situation where they risk a breach of perfectly legal transactions as they often hesitate to execute transactions for lack of clarity and the fear of a possible risk to themselves or their businesses.

The White House or Department of Treasury reveal that recent sanctions are being issued under broad catch-all provisions which appear to be ambiguous as to the basis for the sanctions, and thus are creating confusion and are essentially applicable to not only the listed “oligarchs,” but are extendable to a multitude of Russian citizens. This is a consequence which the Biden administration surely did not intend to bring about – punishing presumptively innocent Russian people or legitimate businesses, rather than the Russian government.

However, the application of these broad, and in some cases unsubstantiated, sanctions to a wide swath of legitimate businesses in the sanctioned countries – as well as other locations where businesspeople of Russian descent have established companies or subsidiaries, including in the US, EU and Israel – has created an atmosphere of serious doubt over whether the secondary sanctions apply to them and to what extent, and are likely to lead to extensive damage and chaos in ongoing or contemplated business transactions, which runs contrary to the essential goals of the sanctions.

Notwithstanding the intended purpose of primary and secondary sanctions, the US has a vested interest in helping legitimate Russian and Belarus business and personnel thrive in their doing of commerce, particularly outside of Russia. And while the US has taken a clear stand in this case, for Israel, which is caught between the two giants, it is not as simple to take an unequivocal step on the issue.

Russia as another important ally
WHILE THE US may be Israel’s most important ally, Russia is another important ally to Israel, and is a critically necessary ally in the Middle East due to its presence and influence in the region, including the Syrian border and Israel’s ongoing efforts to stop Iran’s movement of dangerous and life-threatening terrorist weapons across Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon, a designated Foreign Terror Organization. Israel also has a sizable Russian-speaking citizen population living in the country who maintain families, property and ongoing business and personal ties in Russia.

But despite Israel’s present neutral stance, Israeli banks and businesses do not know if and/or when people and entities of Russian/Belarus origin, with whom they may otherwise do business, will be added to the list.

Accordingly, payments for goods or services from and to parties that are not under sanctions are being held in transfer for weeks and sometimes not finalized as the banks do not know how to interpret the potentiality of their customers coming onto a sanction list on a day-to-day basis, creating risk for the banking sector and causing both Israel and the US to lose valuable growth and creating unnecessary controversies between parties to transactions, which is further likely to cause legitimate Russian businesspeople to turn to competitor countries like China or to do their business in the Gulf, including in Abraham Accords jurisdictions, such as the UAE.

For the sanctions to succeed as intended, quick and simple measures must be taken to assure that innocent Russian businesspeople are not improperly sanctioned or precluded from doing legitimate business with the US, the EU, Israel and other allies.

There needs to be a connection, and easy communication between business and banks around the world and the US Department of Treasury, or other administrative personnel that can provide simple and quick guidance. This perhaps could be accomplished through a clearing desk that can review and approve proposed transactions or provide “no action” letters as to avoid punishing those who have no culpability for the tragic ongoing situation in Ukraine and to help efficiently ensure that sanctions are only applied fairly and properly, as intended.

The triangular relationship between Russian, Israeli and American businesses and governments was always both important and impactful but is now precariously stretched to its limits for the ongoing and needed future legitimate transactions, it is important that this triangular relationship not be turned into a Bermuda Triangle, with the lack of clear instructions that will necessarily make good and valuable transactions disappear into thin air.

The international business and legal community must demand fair and efficient treatment and review of sanctions, threatened and feared, to make sure that sanctions, as applied to third parties, do not unfairly punish legitimate businesses and individuals and damage western companies, economies and innocent businesspeople in the process.

Anna Moshe practices corporate and commercial law in Tel Aviv. The views expressed are the personal views of the author(s); Richard D. Heideman is senior counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, PC, a Washington law firm which represents American victims of terror; Joseph H. Tipograph is a member of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, PC, and previously served as a vice chairman of the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law, Financial Services and Insurance Committee;Yoav Navon is an Israeli lawyer and litigation consultant, with expertise in litigation finance and complex international disputes.

Article published in The Jerusalem Post

An important measure of justice to those who lost life, limb and family as a direct result of the Iranian sponsored bombing

The US District Court for the District of Columbia has entered Judgment against the Islamic Republic of Iran (“Iran”). The designated State Sponsor of Terrorism was ordered by the Court to pay in excess of $325 million in compensatory and punitive damages to more than a dozen servicemen and their families as a result of the October 23, 1983 bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. The victims are represented by the Washington, DC law firm Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., which has represented American victims of terror for two decades with a concentration in civil counter-terror litigation.

The Honorable Royce C. Lamberth of the US District Court for the District of Columbia awarded the damages to the servicemen, and their families. The Court found that Iran was liable for the attack.

In addition to the compensatory damages awarded to each of the Plaintiffs, the Court also awarded punitive damages. “…the defendant must be punished to the fullest extend legally possible for the bombing in Beirut on October 23, 1983,” stated Judge Lamberth, who went on to say that the attack was “a depraved act that destroyed the lives of countless individuals and their families, including the 33 plaintiffs who are parties to this lawsuit.”

“This judgment provides an important measure of justice to those who lost life, limb and family as a direct result of the Iranian sponsored bombing of the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon,” said Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik PC. “Iran must pay the debts that it owes to the victims of the terror it sponsors, including these courageous Marines who were in Beirut on an important peacekeeping mission.”
The case opinion is Ayres et al v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, 1:18-cv-00265 (D.D.C., May 3, 2022) [D.E.68]
About Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C.

The law firm of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., based in Washington, DC, is a global firm with affiliates in various parts of the world. Richard D. Heideman, Noel J. Nudelman, Tracy R. Kalik and other members, associates and affiliates of the firm have extensive experience in complex litigation. The firm has served as lead counsel in numerous cases on behalf of victims of terror and their family members who have been killed or injured in terrorist attacks throughout the world. The firm has successfully brought cases against Libya, the Syrian Arab Republic, The Islamic Republic of Iran, the PA/PLO, Arab Bank plc and others accused of funding or providing material support for terror and continues committed to seeking justice on behalf of Americans who have suffered at the hands of terrorists, their sponsors, supporters and funders.

Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., is the author of the recently published The Bloody Price of Freedom (Gefen Publishing House, 2021) and is available for interviews and comments on matters relating to the ongoing battle against terror and the important use of the American legal system in pursuit of justice.

The US District Court for the District of Columbia has entered Judgment against the Syrian Arab Republic (“Syria”), ordering Syria, as a designated State Sponsor of Terrorism, to pay $108 million in compensatory and punitive damages to Chaim Winternitz and his family as a result of  the March 2016 suicide bombing at the Brussels Airport carried out by The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (more commonly known as “ISIS”), which caused serious injuries to Mr. Winternitz. The victims are represented by the Washington, DC law firm Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., which has represented American victims of terror for two decades and concentrates in civil counter-terror litigation.

The Honorable Timothy J. Kelly of the US District Court for the District of Columbia awarded the damages to Mr. Winternitz, and members of his family, including his daughter who was also present in the airport that day. The Court found that Syria was liable for the attack due to  the material support it provided to ISIS.  ISIS, which claimed responsibility for the attack, has long been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the US government.

In addition to the compensatory damages awarded to each of the Plaintiffs, the Court also awarded punitive damages. “The targeted bombing of a crowded airport was unconscionable,” stated Judge Kelly, who went on to find “the harm it caused was substantial, the need to deter terrorism is high, and Syria is a wealthy sovereign.”

“The ruling is an important victory for the Winternitz family who suffered tremendously as a result of the Syria-sponsored attack upon the Brussels Airport,” said Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik PC.  “It is crucially important to seek to hold sponsors of terror legally accountable and this judgment speaks loudly on behalf of victims of terror, holds Syria accountable for its continued support of terror attacks and terror organizations and, most importantly, provides some measure of justice for these victims.”

About Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C.

The law firm of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C. (www.HNKlaw.com), based in Washington, DC, is a global firm with affiliates in various parts of the world. Richard D. Heideman, Noel J. Nudelman, Tracy R. Kalik and other members, associates and affiliates of the firm have extensive experience in complex litigation. The firm has served as lead counsel in numerous cases on behalf of victims of terror and their family members who have been killed or injured in terrorist attacks throughout the world. The firm has successfully brought cases against Libya, the Syrian Arab Republic, The Islamic Republic of Iran, the PA/PLO, Arab Bank plc and others accused of funding or providing material support for terror and continues committed to seeking justice on behalf of Americans who have suffered at the hands of terrorists, their sponsors, supporters and funders.

Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., is the author of the recently published The Bloody Price of Freedom (Gefen Publishing House, 2021) and is available for interviews and comments on matters relating to the ongoing battle against terror and the important use of the American legal system in pursuit of justice.

For further information, contact:
Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel, Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C.
Tel: 202 463-8018
Email: rdheideman@hnklaw.com