DOE v. DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Cite as 414 F.Supp.3d 109 (D.D.C. 2019)
John DOE A-1, et al. Plaintiffs,
v.
DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC
OF KOREA MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS JUNGSONG-DONG,
Central District, Pyongyang, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Defendant.
109
(6) North Korea was liable for former servicemembers and their estates for assault, battery, false imprisonment, and
intentional infliction of emotional distress; and
(7) North Korea was liable to family members and estates of former United
States servicemembers for solation
damages.
Motion granted.
No. 18-cv-0252 (DLF)
United States District Court,
District of Columbia.
Signed October 22, 2019
Background: Former United States servicemembers, who were kidnapped, imprisoned, and tortured by agents of North
Korea, as well as their families and estates, filed suit against North Korea pursuant to the private cause of action against
foreign State Sponsors of Terrorism provided by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), seeking money damages
for torture, hostage taking, assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of solatium. Plaintiffs moved for partial default
judgment on liability.
Holdings: The District Court, Dabney L.
Friedrich, J., held that:
(1) terrorism exception to FSIA applied,
and thus subject matter jurisdiction
existed;
(2) District Court was required to exercise
its subject matter jurisdiction;
(3) plaintiffs met service of process requirements under FSIA, and thus District Court had personal jurisdiction
over North Korea;
(4) plaintiffs had standing;
(5) North Korea committed acts of hostage-taking, torture, and extrajudicial
killing;
1. Evidence O43(3)
A series of Foreign Sovereign Immunities (FSIA)-related cases will often stem
from one terrorist attack, and courts thus
frequently taken judicial notice of earlier,
related proceedings. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1605A.
2. Evidence O43(1)
In the context of judicial notice, a
court cannot simply adopt factual findings
from an earlier, related proceeding without
scrutiny. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b).
3. Evidence O43(1)
In the context of judicial notice, a
court may rely on evidence presented in
earlier, related litigation and make its own
independent findings of fact based on that
evidence. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b).
4. International Law O518
The standard under which a Foreign
Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) plaintiff
can obtain default judgment against a foreign state by establishing his claim or
right to relief by evidence satisfactory to
the court mirrors the federal civil procedural rule governing default judgments
against the United States government. 28
U.S.C.A. § 1608(e); Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(d).
5. International Law O518
The requirement that a plaintiff pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) establish his claim or right
to relief by evidence satisfactory to the