A Washington, D.C. federal judge entered a $353 million default judgment March 23 against Iran for its role in the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847, according to the plaintiffs’ law firm, Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp.

The commercial airliner was hijacked in 1985 shortly after takeoff from Athens, Greece, headed to Rome, and then on to Boston and Los Angeles, with 139 passengers aboard, most of whom were Americans. The lawsuit, filed by 108 passengers and family members, was filed under a 2008 statute creating a federal cause of action against foreign states designated as State Sponsors of Terrorism for supporting terrorist attacks. Iran was added to the list in 1984, based on its support for a campaign of terrorist hijackings, bombings and kidnappings largely aimed at American citizens.

On June 14, 1985, terrorists from the Iranian-financed terrorist group Hezbollah boarded TWA Flight 847, posing as passengers, while heavily armed with guns, hand grenades and other explosives. When the aircraft reached cruising altitude, they stood up and ran down the aisle, threatening to blow up the aircraft unless Israel released 700 imprisoned Shiite Muslims. The plane was diverted to Beirut, Lebanon for refueling. The hijackers then ordered the plane to fly back and forth between Beirut and Algiers, Algeria for the next three days, releasing small groups of mostly women and children along the way. On the second stop in Beirut, airport authorities turned out the lights and blocked the runways, nearly forcing a crash landing.

During the flight, passengers were beaten, made to hold torturously painful positions for hours, and subjected to mock executions. In Beirut, the terrorists killed Navy diver Robert Stethem, dumping his body on the tarmac. Family members could only imagine the worst, having no way of knowing the fate of their loved ones. Then, 39 male passengers were taken into Beirut, where they were held for several more weeks until Israel agreed to satisfy some of the terrorists’ demands by releasing prisoners held in Israel and Kuwait.

The lawsuit centered on evidence that Iran financed, supported, trained, and guided Hezbollah for the purpose of using terrorist attacks to promote a largely anti-Semitic and anti-American agenda. The U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act affords plaintiffs the ability to sue a foreign country for damages caused by its sponsorship of terrorist attacks. Similar lawsuits against Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea have resulted in judgments for compensatory damages totaling billions of dollars.

In his order granting plaintiffs’ motion for entry of default judgment, District Court Judge Richard Leon noted that the victims’ declarations “paint a harrowing tale of the events that transpired aboard TWA Flight 847.”

“These families have lived with the trauma of the hijacking for over 30 years with little hope of getting closure,” said plaintiffs’ counsel Mark N. Bravin, partner at Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP (MSK). “They have now succeeded in holding Iran accountable in a court of law for its role in the hijacking and are entitled to the damages awarded by the court.”

Each of the 108 plaintiffs will be eligible to seek partial payment of their judgments from the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund. Congress created the Fund in December 2015 to address the difficulties American victims have encountered when trying to enforce court judgments against the foreign states that sponsor terrorist attacks.

“The District Court’s decision acknowledges the significant physical and emotional trauma our clients suffered and will enable them to collect at least a portion of the damages awarded to them by the court,” added Bravin.

The case is Allan, et. al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-00338, United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In addition to Bravin, plaintiffs were represented by Theresa Bowman and Matthew Williams, also of MSK.

To get around the unilateral character of adhesive contracting, U.S. courts have, over the past five decades, refocused contract formation on constructive notice, points out Henry Allen Blair in Arbitration Nation.

“If a reasonable person in the position of the recipient of boilerplate should have seen the terms, the recipient will be bound by those terms, regardless of whether she ever actually read or understood the them. Constructive awareness coupled with an individual purchasing something from a commercial party amounts to assent,” he adds.

The article discusses Starke v. SquareTrade, Inc., in which the Second Circuit concluded that the a purchaser of a consumer product protection plan did not have reasonable notice of an arbitration provision contained in the terms and conditions communicated via a hyperlink in a post-sale email.

Read the article.

Robin O has joined Harrity & Harrity, LLP as an associate, the firm announced in a release.

O is a patent lawyer who focuses on electrical and computer technologies, including telecommunications, computer hardware and software, telematics, data analytics, networking devices, medical devices, and business methods.

“Robin has the unique experience of having worked both in law firms and in-house,” said Harrity & Harrity managing partner John Harrity. “Having been involved in software and business method related inventions for much of his career, I am certain that our clients will benefit from Robin’s experience.”

Prior to joining Harrity & Harrity, O practiced in-house at Allstate Insurance Company. He started his legal career as a patent agent at Miller, Matthias & Hull. He earned his B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and his J.D. from the Loyola University Chicago School of Law.

Chamberlain Hrdlicka announced that it has elevated four new shareholders. Atlanta-based attorneys Erica Opitz and Chris Steele, Houston-based attorney Justice David Medina and Philadelphia-based attorney Kevin Sweeney were named shareholders.

“Each of these attorneys have contributed significantly to the success of our firm through their hard work and dedication to providing great client service,” said Wayne Risoli, the firm’s managing shareholder. “The number of attorneys joining our shareholder ranks this year is a testament to our continued growth and commitment to achieving excellent results for our clients. We are confident that their leadership will bring continued success to Chamberlain Hrdlicka.”

Erica Opitz
Opitz focuses her practice on corporate, securities and finance and often serves as outside general counsel to her clients. She counsels start-ups and corporate clients on a variety of financial transactions including mergers and acquisitions, securities offerings, capital raises, real estate transactions and loans. Opitz earned her undergraduate degree from Binghamton University and her law degree from Mercer University School of Law.

Christopher Steele
Steele’s practice focuses on trusts and estates, where he handles estate and asset protection planning as well as the administration of complex trusts and estates. He has experience in counseling clients on issues relating to complex wills, revocable and irrevocable trusts, grantor trusts, life insurance planning and complex gifting techniques. He earned his undergraduate degree from Georgia State University, his law degree from Mercer University School of Law and a Master of Laws degree in taxation from the University of Florida.

Justice David M. Medina
Medina works with clients in multiple industries on various trials, business transactions and appeals. Justice Medina previously served on the Texas Supreme Court and authored over 90 Supreme Court Opinions. He earned his undergraduate degree from Texas State University, his law degree from South Texas College of Law and his Master of Laws degree in global energy, international arbitration and environmental law from the University of Texas.

Kevin Sweeney
Sweeney works with clients involved in civil and criminal tax controversy and litigation matters. He focuses on high-stakes IRS audits, civil tax litigation, white-collar criminal defense matters and corporate investigations for high and ultra-high net worth individuals, business owners and public and private companies worldwide. He earned his undergraduate degree from Loyola University and his law degree from New York Law School.

Image by Steve Jurvetson

A federal judge in New York will hear oral arguments next week in a lawsuit brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission that seeks to hold Tesla CEO Elon Musk in contempt for violating a settlement deal, according to a CNN report.

Judge Alison Nathan will consider the SEC’s request that Musk be held in contempt for violating a settlement agreement reached last year, which required he get pre-approval for social media posts about the electric car company, writes CNN’s Victoria Cavaliere.

Musk tweeted on Feb. 19 that Tesla would produce “around 500k [cars] in 2019.” Hours later, he posted a follow-up tweet indicating that the company will actually deliver just 400,000 cars this year.

Although Musk corrected his mistake, regulators said he had “once again published inaccurate and material information about Tesla to his over 24 million Twitter followers,” according to court papers.

Read the CNN article.

Stacia Hollinshead, a 30-year-old assistant state’s attorney from DeKalb County, Ill., was murdered in Wisconsin, and her ex-husband has been arrested.

The Daily Chronicle of DeKalb, Ill., reports that Hollinshead, who is a mother of one and a graduate of Northern Illinois University’s Law School, was pronounced dead at the scene, in her parents’ house in Wisconsin.

Police arrested her ex-husband, Ulisses Medina Espinoza, in connection with the murder. Hollinshead had sought a protective court order to keep Medina Espinosa away from her, citing a pattern of verbal and digital harassment.

The report quotes Mark Cordes, interim dean and professor of law at NIU’s College of Law: “Stacia had tremendous potential as a lawyer and a very bright future ahead of herself. She was the type of graduate that makes our school very proud.”

Read the Daily Chronicle article.

Bloomberg Law is reporting that a Washington, D.C., attorney is in criminal contempt of court for refusing to answer questions about where his client’s assets could be found, the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed March 26.

The court found that Matthew LeFande disregarded oral and written orders to answer questions on the witness stand by the magistrate judge in the underlying case. That underlying litigation began when LeFande’s client sold a property through a real estate settlement company, and the company mistakenly transferred almost $300,000 back to her instead of to her mortgage lender.

At a status conference, the magistrate judge ordered LeFande to answer questions, but he refused, asserting attorney-client and Fifth Amendment privileges, writes Bloomberg’s Martina Barash.

Read the Bloomberg Law article.

The Russian election interference report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, still not fully disclosed, is raising a number of questions and also surprised some who practice criminal law, according to a report by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

“It is perhaps somewhat surprising that Mr. Mueller didn’t provide a conclusion on the issue of obstruction of justice. Certainly, many Americans were expecting a clear-cut decision,” said Philip Hilder, a former U.S. prosecutor in Houston who now is a white-collar criminal defense lawyer at Hilder & Associates, P.C.

“But proving either conspiracy or obstruction is a difficult challenge. Until the portion of the actual Mueller report is disclosed articulating his rationale, I could only speculate as to why there is no solid conclusion after a two-year investigation.

“Perhaps more surprising is that Attorney General William Barr concluded after only 48 hours of review that the investigation is not sufficient to establish that the president obstructed justice. Assuming the bulk of the report itself is released, a fuller picture will come into focus as to why Mueller demurred and whether Mr. Barr’s conclusion is justified,” said Hilder who has represented whistleblowers and other defendants in high-profile trials.

“As to how much of the report and grand jury testimony should be turned over to Congress, it is reasonable to assume that a large portion is based on grand jury material. A court order is needed to release that information. A blanket release requested by Congress may not be possible, since there may be evidence disclosed that is related to ongoing investigations by other federal prosecutors as well criminal prosecutions already indicted by the Mueller team. Nonetheless, it may take a while until all the grand jury material is scrutinized before its possible release. I would anticipate rolling production, with Congress receiving parts of the report over time.”

Lauren G. Raines has joined Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP’s Tampa office as a partner in the Banking and Financial Services and Real Estate practice groups, the firm announced in a release.

“It is a pleasure to welcome Lauren to our Tampa office,” said Bradley Tampa office managing partner R. Craig Mayfield. “By combining her transactional practice in commercial lending with her track record and experience in litigation, Lauren is well positioned to help our clients maximize opportunities for business success in diverse financial and real estate matters. She is a great addition to our firm.”

The firm said Raines handles commercial lending transactional matters as well as financial services litigation. Her litigation work has involved commercial and consumer mortgage foreclosure trials for banks and mortgage servicers across Florida. She also has experience handling lender liability claims, usury actions, lien priority claims, fraudulent transfer claims, and violations of federal and Florida consumer protection statutes. In her commercial lending transactional practice, Raines handles construction loans; loans secured by retail centers, industrial facilities and multi-family housing; and asset-based loans. She also handles loan assumptions, defeasances, loan workouts, debt restructurings and forbearances, and she regularly advises clients on Florida documentary stamp tax issues related to complex lending transactions.

Prior to joining Bradley, Raines was a partner with Quarles & Brady LLP.

Raines received her J.D. from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law – Yeshiva University and her Master of Laws from New York University School of Law. She also holds a Bachelor of Arts (with honors) from the University of Florida.

James (Jim) M. Davis has joined Perkins Coie’s Insurance Recovery practice as a partner in Chicago, the firm announced in a release.

“Insurance recovery litigation remains a challenging area requiring experience and skill, especially given the continuous evolution of risks and exposures facing businesses, regardless of industry,” said Robert Jacobs, chair of Perkins Coie’s Insurance Recovery practice. “Jim has years of experience and a record of success concerning a wide range of insurance issues and will deepen our bench of seasoned attorneys assisting policyholders in enforcing their rights to insurance coverage.”

The firm said Davis advises insurance policyholders on coverage matters, including a variety of product liability disputes, recalls and product contamination. He also works on liability cases related to cyber issues and directors’ and officers’ issues, and employment matters. Jim also represents manufacturing and service industry clients in matters related to unfair competition, indemnity, breach of contract and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Davis earned his J.D. from the Chicago-Kent College of Law, where he was awarded the Order of the Coif. He received his B.A. from the University of Washington. He joins the firm from Reed Smith, where he previously had served as the deputy practice group leader of the Insurance Recovery group.

“Illinois and the greater Chicago market are major hubs for insurance coverage litigation in the United States,” said Rick Sevcik, managing partner of Perkins Coie’s Chicago office. “Jim’s experience, reputation, and leadership will be assets to the firm, the Chicago office and our client relationships. In addition to his excellent local reputation in the Midwest, he will be able to leverage a strong national network, including in Seattle.”

Peter T. Tschanz has joined Littler as an associate in the Indianapolis office. He joins from Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP.

“Peter has an impressive background representing management in a variety of industries on their most pressing employment law issues,” said Alan L. McLaughlin, Indianapolis office managing shareholder. “His experience and skillset will add further depth to our service to regional and national clients and we are excited to welcome him to our team.”

In a release, the firm said Tschanz counsels companies on a wide-range of issues that arise out of the employer-employee relationship, including hiring, performance management and termination issues; wage and hour compliance; and development of noncompetition and trade secret agreements. He also represents employers in litigated disputes, arbitrations and before administrative agencies, and on compliance with federal and state employment laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.

Tschanz received his J.D., magna cum laude, from Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law and his B.A. from Loyola University Chicago. He has been recognized as a Rising Star for Employment & Labor by Indiana Super Lawyers each year from 2012 to 2019 and was selected for inclusion in the 2019 edition of Best Lawyers in America for Employment Law – Management.

REIT tax lawyer Cristina Arumi is rejoining Hogan Lovells, the firm announced in a release.

She will be head of the firm’s U.S. REIT tax practice and will work alongside David Bonser, who heads up the REIT practice. Arumi joins from Ernst & Young, where she worked in the REIT and pass-through group from the national tax office.

“Cristina is a superstar – she is highly regarded by clients and colleagues for her lightning-sharp tax acumen, creative solutions, and strong client relationship skills,” said Prentiss Feagles, a Hogan Lovells partner who has led the REIT Tax practice. “These qualities, together with her strong leadership skills, make Cristina perfect to work with David Bonser and others in building one of the strongest REIT practices in the United States.”

Before departing for Ernst & Young in 2013, Arumi spent 17 years with Hogan Lovells, focusing her practice on the tax aspects of capital markets and M&A transactions, including REITs, real estate funds and joint ventures as well as the tax aspects of foreign investment in U.S. real estate. As a principal in Ernst & Young’s national tax department’s pass-throughs and real estate group, Arumi led real estate transactions working extensively with REITs, including many clients of Hogan Lovells, sovereign wealth funds and other major investors in U.S. real estate, the firm said.

“Hogan Lovells’ REIT practice is one of the best in the country, and I am excited to rejoin the team,” Arumi said. “I’ve maintained strong relationships with many of my friends and colleagues at Hogan Lovells, and I’m looking forward to the opportunity to work with David and the other partners to build on the continued success of the REIT practice.”

Arumi received her B.A. from the University of North Carolina, her J.D. from Duke University School of Law, and her LL.M in tax from the Georgetown University Law Center.

Above the Law reports that a U.S. District Judge delivered a benchslap to a Baker Donelson partner and a senior public policy advisor after they tried to jump the line in a receivership situation involving a hundred-million-dollar Ponzi scheme.

The judge had put a hold on any individual victim trying to carve back money in lieu of allowing a receiver to get the maximum recovery for all victims, but then Jon Seawright, the Baker Donelson partner, and Brent Alexander, the firm’s lobbyist, went out and tried to recover some money.

The judge responded with a lecture about the concept of a receivership, using the boarding process on Southwest Airlines as an example, writes Above the Law’s Joe Patrice.

Read the Above the Law article.

First NBC Bank’s former top lawyer was charged in federal court Friday with conspiracy to defraud the New Orleans bank, which failed two years ago in the biggest U.S. bank collapse since the 2008 financial crisis, reports The News Orleans Advocate.

Gregory St. Angelo was First NBC’s general counsel for a decade until 2016. During that time, according to the Advocate‘s Anthony McAuley, he took out loans totaling tens of millions of dollars from the bank, many of which went into default.

“St. Angelo was charged in a bill of information rather than a grand jury indictment, generally a sign that a defendant has agreed to plead guilty and cooperate with prosecutors. He is due for a first appearance in federal court March 29,” writes McAuley.

Read the Advocate article.

The Dallas Morning News reports that Haley Taylor Schlitz, who graduated from high school at 13, is preparing to attend Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law this fall, one of nine schools that accepted her, according to the American Bar Association.

Haley was homeschooled after her parents withdrew her from public school in the fifth grade because they didn’t like the way she was being taught, writes the Dallas News‘ Sarah Sarder. After high school, she began taking classes at Tarrant County College and started at Texas Woman’s University in 2017, according to her website.

“Haley initially wanted to go into medicine like her mother but now wants to become an attorney and advocate for gifted students from traditionally neglected communities. She has spoken out against systemic racism in American public schools,” according to Sarder.

Read the Dallas News article.

Some legal rankings and guides truly do a good job of identifying top-rate attorneys in various areas of practice, but others are simply brazen attempts to capitalize on a lawyer’s vanity in exchange for a fee, warns Bruce Vincent of Muse Communications.

“Knowing the difference between a reputable listing and one that holds no real meaning or value is key for effective marketing,” he writes. “Imagine spending money and time to promote your selection to a ‘best’ list only to find out that the other lawyers on the list have no business being there based on their level of experience or expertise.”

He explains the importance of learning how to spread the word about earning a spot on a top-lawyer list, because there is little chance that your honor will get noticed by your most important audiences. Then he offers suggestions on how to get real benefit from the honor.

Read the article.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is continuing to aggressively investigate and bring enforcement action against companies that engage in energy market manipulation, reports WilmerHale in its 10-in-10 Hot Topics in Energy Series.

These investigations and proceedings mirror Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) action on financial market manipulation in the energy area.

“As the recent Powhatan and Silkman decisions indicate, the body of case law defining FERC’s enforcement authority continues to develop. Regulated companies should be aware that the statute of limitations in market manipulation cases will likely be read permissively. A strong internal compliance program, coupled with self-reporting in appropriate instances, can help reduce risk,” according to the article’s authors.

Read the article.

Expert Webcast will present a complimentary webinar roundtable titled “The Role of Financial Experts in Commercial Litigation.”

The event will be Tuesday, March 26, 2019, 1-2 p.m. Eastern time.

Speakers will be Dan Boland of Pepper Hamilton, Jeff Litvak of FTI Consulting, Clara Chin of FTI Consulting, and Alex Kasan of DelMorgan & Co.

Anyone who wants access to the replay of the webinar may indicate that preference in the last field of the registration form.

Register for the webinar.

A recent Texas Supreme Court opinion provides a definitive answer to the question of whether a party can ignore the written words of a contract that directly contradict what you are being told by your counterparty is the real deal.

Glenn D. West, writing for Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP’s Global Private Equity Watch, discusses Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC v. Carduco Inc.

“While it is often said that fraud vitiates a contract that was entered into based upon that fraud (and such fraud would also trump the parol evidence rule), that statement is only true if there was actually legally-recognized fraud that induced the making of the contract. But a fraud cause of action does not consist simply of an allegation that the defendant made a false statement of fact to the plaintiff, knowingly or recklessly,” West writes.

The Texas Supreme Court found that “[b]ecause the conduct and action of [the defendants] on which [the plaintiff] relies to establish its fraudulent-inducement claim are directly contrary to the unambiguous terms of the contract it signed, we conclude that [the plaintiff’s] reliance thereon was unjustified as a matter of law.”

Read the article.