Sutherland v. Islamic Republic of Iran

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Iran and MOIS were liable for the intentional infliction of emotional distress of plaintiffs who did not witness the terrorist act but whose immediate family members did
• concluding that “when an organization takes someone hostage, it is implicitly intending to cause emotional distress among the members of that hostage’s immediate family”
• finding that plaintiff, taken hostage under similar circumstances to the instant case, was held hostage within the meaning of the FSIA
• holding “defendants . . . liable under the tort doctrines of respondeat superior and joint and several liability”
• finding that plaintiff, taken hostage under similar circumstances to the instant case, was held hostage within the meaning of the FSIA
• holding in Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act case that the “formula which has evolved as a standard in hostage cases . . .grants the former hostage roughly $10,000 for each day of his captivity.”’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).