TERRORISM AND TERROR FINANCING
Terror Sponsored by Arab Bank, PLC: Philip Litle, et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC
Co-counsel for over one hundred and fifty American plaintiffs in and ongoing action against a Jordanian Bank for the facilitation of acts of international terrorism and provision of material support to various terrorist groups involved in the Second Intifada, which resulted in the death and injury to American nationals. In September 2014, obtained judgment as to liability against the Bank, the first time that a financial institution has ever been found liable under the Ant-Terrorism Act. A confidential settlement has been reached to compensate these clients for their personal injury and death claims.
Beirut Marine Barracks Bombing: Estate of Stephen Bland, et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran et al.; also Brown v; also Spencer/Silvia
Counsel for approximately 170 marines and their family members who victims of the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanonan in an action against The Islamic Republic of Iran for the death and injury of over 240 United States servicemen as a result of a state-sponsored terrorism bombing at the Beirut Marine barracks in 1983. Obtained a judgment in Bland in the amount of $1,233,458,232; Brown in the amount of $813,768,945; and client Spencer/Silvia included in the Valore case in the amount of $12,565,922. As result thereof, the firm, along with co-counsel in that case who also have judgments against the Islamic Republic of Iran, have been able to attach approximately $1.9 billion dollars in assets to satisfy a portion of their judgments. The assets have been ordered to be turned over to the firm’s clients and other victims of Iranian terrorism, and a distribution process is underway.
Note: In Valore, Richard D. Heideman as counsel to Spencer/Silvia argued the issue of punitive damages to the Chief Judge of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, who awarded a punitive damages judgment of one billion dollars.
International Court of Justice: Relating to the Legal Consequences of the Construction by Israel of a Terrorism Prevention Security Fence
As Counsel to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (“FDD”), submitted a Friend of the Court brief to the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) on January 30, 2004, on the issues then pending before the Court relating to Israel’s terrorism prevention security fence.
• View: Background Briefing and Analysis
Hijacking: Patrick Scott Baker, et al. v. Libya and Syria
Counsel to the American Victims of the terrorist hijacking of EgyptAir Flight 648 on November 23, 1985, during which each American on board the flight was shot in the head by the terrorists. The evidence obtained showed that Libya and Syria were involved in the hijacking. Clients were included in awards from the settlement with Libya. US District Court for the District of Columbia awarded a judgment against Syria in the amount of $450,000,000.
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, et al. v. Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, et al.
Counsel to Certain Underwriters and Companies at Lloyd’s of London in an action against the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Syrian Arab Republic and other defendants for conversion, trespass and destruction of Plaintiffs’ property, and facilitating acts of terrorism. This action arises out of the November 23, 1985 terrorist hijacking of EgyptAir Flight 648, which caused its destruction beyond repair. Case resulted in US District Court for the District of Columbia entering Judgment on behalf of the Plaintiffs in the amount of $51 million USD.
Rome Airport Attack: The Estate of John Buonocore, III, et al. v. Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, et al
Co-counsel to eight American families in and action against the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Syrian Arab Republic and other defendants for the death or injury to themselves or their family members as a result of the terrorist attack at the Leonardo da Vinci Airport in Rome, Italy on December 27, 1985. Clients were included in awards from the settlement with Libya. US District Court for the District of Columbia awarded a judgment against Syria in the amount of $171,715,750.
Hotel Bombing in Jordan: Thuneibat, et al v Syrian Arab Republic, et al.
Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, PC has obtained a $347 million dollar judgment in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against the Syrian Arab Republic for its sponsorship of and providing material support to the terrorist organization Al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI).
The Court has awarded the judgment to the families of Mousab Ahmad Khorma and Lina Mansoor Thuneibat both whom were American citizens and were killed in the 2005 terrorist bombing of the Radisson SAS hotel in Amman, Jordan. Lina Thuneibat was 9 years old at the time of her death and was in the hotel to attend a family wedding. Mousab Khorma was a 39 year-old deputy chairman for Cairo Amman Bank and was waiting for friends in the lobby of the hotel at the time the suicide bombers entered the lobby. Shortly after the bombings, AQI claimed responsibility for the attack.
The Judge found that Syria, a U.S. State Department listed sponsor of state terrorism since 1979, allowed foreign terrorists, such as AQI, to freely operate through its country. Syria provided essential financial services to AQI which were then used by AQI and its leaders to finance this and other attacks.
Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel of HNK, stated “Holding sponsors of terror legally accountable is an essential tool in combatting terrorism and in achieving justice for the victims and their families.”
• View: Memorandum Opinion
Terror in Israel: Estate of Yael Botvin, et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran et al.
Counsel to the Botvin family arising out of the September 4, 1997 suicide bombing at Jerusalem’s Ben Yehuda Street pedestrian mall, which injured and killed Yael Botvin, a 14 year-old American citizen. This action was filed against the Islamic Republic of Iran and others, alleging that Iran provided material support and resources to Hamas, the terrorist group that carried out the attack. The US District Court entered judgments for a combined amount of $52,594,457.
Terror in Israel: Lelchook v Syria
Counsel to the Lelchook family arising out the August 2, 2006 rocket attack on Kibbutz Sa-ar, which killed David Martin Lelchook, a 52 year-old American citizen. This action was filed against the Syrian Arab Republic, alleging that Syria provided material support and resources to Hizbollah, the terrorist group that carried out the attack.
• View: Complaint
International: Partner Communications Ltd- Orange Brand License Holder in Israel.
Richard D. Heideman, Senior Counsel, and the law firm of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., served as lead counsel for Partner Communications Company Ltd. (NASDAQ and TASE: PTNR), a leading Israeli communications company, in the negotiation and drafting of an agreement with Orange (ORAN.PA), a leading French Telecommunications operator, which created a new framework for their relationship.
Consumer Protection – Deception – Elkies, et al. v. Johnson and Johnson Services, Inc., et al.
Counsel in a putative class action alleging that representations on the front of the Infants’ Tylenol packaging (the text “Infants” and a picture of a mother holding her baby) are likely to deceive reasonable consumers into believing Infants’ Tylenol is unique/specially formulated for infants, when in fact it is the same medicine found in a bottle of Children’s Tylenol, Defendants’ other Tylenol-branded pediatric over-the-counter pain reliever/fever reducer. In other words, Infants’ Tylenol is just Children’s Tylenol sold in different packaging for a substantially higher price per ounce—the only differences are the sizes available and the dosing devices included with the medicine. Specifically, the lawsuit claims that J&J violated California’s False Advertising Law, Business and Professions Code §§ 17200 and §§ 17500, and California Civil Code §§ 1750.
Product Design Defect – Consumer Protection: Katz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated vs Garmin LTD. et al
Counsel filed a putative class action alleging that Garmin International, Inc. and Garmin LLC have allegedly designed, manufactured and marketed the Garmin Forerunner 610 Watch with a watchband the company knows to be defective. The watchband of the Forerunner 610 uses a plastic watchband that is attached to the watch face with two metal pins. Garmin has marketed the Forerunner 610 watch as being rugged and to be used during intense physical activities such as high intensity aerobic training. Despite the marketing claims, the watchband’s defective design results in detachment of the band from the watch face, causing some consumers to either lose or damage their Forerunner 610 or to have to replace the watchband. On November 3, 2016, the Court granted final approval of the settlement.
Product Liability – Defective Design – Consumer Protection: Walter E Klinger, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated v. Motorola
Lead Counsel in a class action filed against Motorola claiming that Motorola violated implied and express warranties, negligence laws, and state consumer protection statutes when they designed, manufactured and distributed allegedly defective antennas utilized on their StarTac model cellular telephones. Settled the case which provided the class with up to $14.5 million in benefits.
Products Liability – Consumer Protection: Arthur Hoyte, MD, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. YUM! Brands, Inc. d/b/a KFC
Counsel in a class action filed against YUM! Brands, Inc. d/b/a KFC alleging that KFC violated District of Columbia consumer protection laws by selling food items that were prepared with products containing trans fats. Trans fats are known to be unhealthy for people to consume. Following filing of the action, YUM! Brands / KFC announced they would discontinue the use of trans-fats oils used for preparing Kentucky Fried Chicken.