ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> JURIST - The Paper Chase

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal News

: JURIST - The Paper Chase

Federal judge denies motion to dismiss apartheid lawsuits against US companies

By Bernard Hibbitts (editor) and University of Pittsburgh School of Law students.

ADVERTISEMENTS
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) on Wednesday denied in part a motion to dismiss lawsuits against some companies accused of assisting South Africa's apartheid-era government can go forward. The lawsuit, brought by a class of thousands of South African plaintiffs against several companies under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), alleges the companies were complicit in the oppression of the black majority by doing business with the country during apartheid. In denying defendants' motion to dismiss, Judge Shira Scheindlin rejected arguments by the US and South African governments that the lawsuits could harm relations between the two countries. All claims against IBM, Ford Motor Co., Daimler, General Motors Corp., and Rheinmetall Group were not dismissed based on arguments that the companies knew their products would be used to support apartheid. Scheindlin also dismissed claims against certain companies for "merely doing business with the apartheid government of South Africa." The case was returned to the SDNY after the US Supreme Court affirmed a Second Circuit judgment in May on the rare grounds that it lacked a quorum due to four recusals. The Second Circuit's decision allowed the ATCA action to go forward to trial, but had dismissed additional claims filed under the Torture Victims Protection Act. The Supreme Court's recusals were statutorily required because several justices had financial conflicts, but raised fairness concerns and brought about discussion as to possible effects on future cases.

Full post as published by JURIST - The Paper Chase on April 09, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0132 secs (new cache)