Anti-Terrorism Act – Subject-matter Jurisdiction

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Stanley Boim, et al., v. American Muslims for Palestine, et al.,

Case No.: 20-3233

Officials: KANNE, SCUDDER, and KIRSCH, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Anti-Terrorism Act – Subject-matter Jurisdiction

In 1996 David Boim was shot and killed by Hamas terrorists while studying abroad in Israel. His parents later sued several American nonprofit organizations for their role in funding Hamas and secured a $156 million judgment under the federal Anti-Terrorism Act. Those organizations then shuttered, leaving Stanley and Joyce Boim mostly empty handed. So in 2017 they filed a new lawsuit against two different American entities and three individuals, alleging that these new defendants are alter egos of the now defunct nonprofit organizations and therefore liable for the remainder of the $156 million judgment.

In the new lawsuit, the district court allowed limited jurisdictional discovery, decided the new entities and individuals were not alter egos of the defunct nonprofits, and then dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This should not have happened, for the district court’s finding on the alter ego question constituted a merits determination that went beyond a proper jurisdictional inquiry. Because the Boims’ new lawsuit arises under the Anti-Terrorism Act, the district court possessed federal jurisdiction and should have allowed the case to proceed on the merits, consistent with the ordinary course of civil litigation. We therefore reverse and remand for renewed proceedings.

Reversed and remanded

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.