Abtan v. Blackwater

Last updated
Abtan v. Blackwater
Seal of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.png
Court United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Full case nameEstate of Himoud Saed Abtan, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Blackwater Lodge and Training Center, et al.
Estate of Ali Hussamaldeen Albazzaz and Estate of Kadhum Kayiz Aziz v. Blackwater Lodge and Training Center, et al.
DecidedApril 27, 2009
Docket nos. 1:07-cv-01831
Citation(s)611 F. Supp. 2d 1
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Reggie Walton

Atban v. Blackwater, 611 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2009), was a lawsuit brought by the victims and families affected by the September 16, 2007 Blackwater Baghdad shootings against Blackwater Worldwide, a private military contractor since renamed Academi . The case was consolidated with Estate of Albazzaz, et al. v. Blackwater Lodge and Training Center, Inc. et al., [1] and the consolidated case was ultimately settled confidentially out of court. [2]

Contents

Background

The September 16 Blackwater Baghdad shootings was an unprovoked [3] attack on Iraqi civilians by a number of heavily armed Blackwater personnel, including two Blackwater helicopters. According to numerous conflicting reports, the shooting started after a small car had mistakenly failed to comply with an Iraqi police officer's call to stop, the Blackwater guards then fired on the car, possibly believing it to be a suicide bomber. However, a conflicting report filed by Blackwater, [4] the security guards, who were at the time guarding a US State Department convoy, had been fired on first and responded with measured, small arms fire directed specifically at those who had attacked them.

Case

The suit was filed on behalf of a number of Iraqi citizens by the Center for Constitutional Rights and a number of other lawyers alleging that Blackwater had violated US and international law, as well as participating in war crimes and violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act. According to the complaint, Blackwater had “created and fostered a culture of lawlessness amongst its employees, encouraging them to act in the company’s financial interests at the expense of innocent human life” and that Blackwater deployed "shooters" in Baghdad knowing that some were using steroids or other psychoactive substances. The suit also claims that Blackwater should be liable for claims of assault and battery, wrongful death, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring, training and supervision. Plaintiffs also moved to include a claim that Blackwater intentionally destroyed evidence by repainting the vehicles involved in the Nisoor Square massacre and by shredding documents pertaining to the company’s criminal and civil legal exposures.

Timeline

October 11, 2007: The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

November 27, 2007: An amended complaint was filed, adding the families of two other victims, as well as adding the additional charge that Blackwater routinely deploys heavily armed "shooters" in the streets of Baghdad with the knowledge that up to 25 percent of them are chemically influenced by steroids or other judgment-altering substances, and fails to take effective steps to stop and test for drug use. It further alleged that the Blackwater personnel who fired on the Iraqi civilians had ignored directives from the Tactical Operations Center ("TOC"), which was staffed by both Blackwater and Department of State personnel, to stay in another area with State Department personnel they had dropped off until further instructed to leave the area.

March 28, 2008: A second amended complaint was filed to join the family of an additional Iraqi who had been killed as well as nine additional injured Iraqi survivors. On April 8, 2008, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of venue, to which the plaintiffs filed an opposition on April 22, 2008. Judge Walton ordered that this case be consolidated with Estate of Albazzaz, et al. v. Blackwater Lodge and Training Center, Inc. et al. for purposes of pre-trial discovery and briefing.

April 28, 2008: Plaintiffs filed a motion to file a third amended complaint in order to include spoliation claims.

May 7, 2008: Defendants filed their opposition to the third motion to amend the complaint, to which the plaintiffs filed a reply on May 19, 2008.

April 27, 2009: Judge Walton ordered that the defendants' motion to dismiss or transfer venue be stayed in order to allow the plaintiffs to request limited venue discovery. [5]

July 17, 2009: Abtan consolidated with Albazzaz.

January 6, 2010: Plaintiffs conclude settlement of consolidated cases.

Related Research Articles

Blackwater was an American private military company founded on December 26, 1996, by former Navy SEAL officer Erik Prince. It was renamed Xe Services in 2009, and was again renamed Academi in 2011 after it was acquired by a group of private investors. In 2014, Academi merged with Triple Canopy, a subsidiary of Constellis Group. Later, Academi was fully integrated into the parent company, and now operates under the name Constellis.

In United States federal law, the Daubert standard is a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony. A party may raise a Daubert motion, a special motion in limine raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury. The Daubert trilogy are the three United States Supreme Court cases that articulated the Daubert standard:

Custer Battles, LLC was a defense contractor headquartered in Middletown, Rhode Island, with offices in McLean, Virginia. The company now appears to be out of business. At one time the company offered services that include security services, litigation support, global risk consulting, training and business intelligence, but had no background or track record in offering any of these services.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Center for Constitutional Rights</span> U.S. nonprofit organization

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) is a progressive non-profit legal advocacy organization based in New York City, New York, in the United States. It was founded in 1966 by Arthur Kinoy, William Kunstler and others particularly to support activists in the implementation of civil rights legislation and to achieve social justice.

<i>Wilson v. Libby</i>

Wilson v. Libby, 498 F. Supp. 2d 74, affirmed, 535 F.3d 697, was a civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on 13 July, 2006, by Valerie Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV, against Richard Armitage (individually) for allegedly revealing her identity and thus irresponsibly infringing upon her Constitutional rights and against Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney, Lewis Libby, Karl Rove, and the unnamed others (together) because the latter, in addition, allegedly "illegally conspired to reveal her identity." The lawsuit was ultimately dismissed.

The Nisour Square massacre occurred on September 16, 2007, when employees of Blackwater Security Consulting, a private military company contracted by the US government to provide security services in Iraq, shot at Iraqi civilians, killing 17 and injuring 20 in Nisour Square, Baghdad, while escorting a U.S. embassy convoy. The killings outraged Iraqis and strained relations between Iraq and the United States. In 2014, four Blackwater employees were tried and convicted in U.S. federal court; one of murder, and the other three of manslaughter and firearms charges; all four convicted were controversially pardoned by President Donald Trump in December 2020, in violation of international law.

Andrew J. Moonen, currently working for the Washington State Department of Corrections in the Special Offender Unit at the Monroe Correctional Complex, is a former employee of Blackwater Security, accused by the Iraq government of murdering Raheem Khalif, a security guard of the Iraqi Vice-president, Adel Abdul Mahdi. Khalif died from three gunshot wounds. Moonen, originally from Kalispell, Montana, in the US, served previously in the 82nd Airborne Division of the United States Army; he received an honorable discharge. In the wake of the killing, the United States Department of State and Blackwater USA had attempted to keep his identity secret for security reasons. Currently, Moonen lives in Seattle, Washington. Responding to claims of company-wide negligence, Erik Prince, the company's founder, said “when we found knucklehead behavior, we fired them.”

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stephen Murphy III</span> American judge

Stephen Joseph Murphy III is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ricardo M. Urbina</span> American judge

Ricardo M. Urbina is a former United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

<i>Landeros v. Flood</i> Court case in California

Landeros v. Flood was a 1976 court case in the state of California involving child abuse and alleged medical malpractice.

<i>King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Assn v. Blackwell</i>

King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell, 448 F. Supp. 2d 876, is a court case filed on August 31, 2006 to define if the Ohio Secretary of State at the time, Kenneth Blackwell, had violated the Civil Rights Act, first, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments to the United States Constitution through previous election procedure.

Susan L. Burke is an American lawyer known for cases in which she has represented plaintiffs suing the American military or military contractors, such as the Abtan v. Blackwater case. She represented former detainees of Abu Ghraib prison in a suit against interrogators and translators from CACI and Titan Corp. who were tasked with obtaining military intelligence from them during their detention.

<i>Doe ex. rel. Tarlow v. District of Columbia</i>

Doe ex. rel. Tarlow v. District of Columbia, 489 F.3d 376, is a unanimous decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, written by Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh, in which the Court upheld a 2003 District of Columbia statute that stated the conditions for authorizing a non-emergency surgical procedure on a mentally incompetent person. This case developed out of an appeal to a district court decision that was brought on behalf of a mentally incompetent patient who was subjected to an abortion without her consent and another patient who was subjected to an eye surgery without the patient's consent. Under the appellate court's interpretation of the statute, a court located in the District of Columbia must apply the "best interest of the patient" standard to a person who was never competent, and the court must apply the "known wishes of the patient" standard to a person who was once competent. The appellate decision was remanded to the District Court.

<i>Stone v. Trump</i> Lawsuit filed on August 28, 2017

Stone v. Trump (1:17-cv-02459-MJG) is a lawsuit filed on August 28, 2017 in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The lawsuit alleges that President Donald Trump's ban on transgender personnel joining the U.S. military violates their equal protection and due process rights. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Maryland filed the suit on behalf of Petty Officer First Class Brock Stone, an 11-year veteran of the U.S. Navy, and several other transgender service members. In addition to President Trump, the suit names as defendants the Secretaries of Defense, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Presidential Memorandum on Military Service by Transgender Individuals (2017)</span>

The Presidential Memorandum on Military Service by Transgender Individuals, officially the Presidential Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security, is the 27th presidential memorandum signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on August 25, 2017. The intent was to prevent transgender people from serving in the U.S. military, on the basis that they would be a financial burden due to sex reassignment procedures and associated costs. It did not exclude transgenders indiscriminately. Federal courts delayed the implementation of this rule by issuing four injunctions. On January 22, 2019, however, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration's ban to take effect.

<i>Doe v. Trump</i> (2017) Lawsuit filed on August 9, 2017 and decided January 4, 2019

Jane Doe v. Trump (1:17-cv-01597-CKK) was a lawsuit filed on August 9, 2017 and decided January 4, 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The suit sought to block Donald Trump and top Pentagon officials from implementing the proposed ban on military service for transgender people under the auspices of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment. The court ruled that the Trump administration's policy should not be blocked. Nonetheless, the Trump administration's policy continued to be blocked due to three preliminary injunctions against it that were not part of this lawsuit and which remained in effect as of the lawsuit's conclusion on January 4, 2019.

<i>Stockman v. Trump</i> Lawsuit filed on September 5, 2017

Stockman v. Trump (5:17-cv-01799-JGB-KKx) is an old lawsuit filed on September 5, 2017, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The suit, like the similar prior suits Jane Doe v. Trump, Stone v. Trump, and Karnoski v. Trump, seeks to block Trump and top Pentagon officials from implementing the proposed ban on military service for transgender people under the auspices of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment. The suit was filed on the behalf of four named and three anonymous transgender plaintiffs by Equality California (EQCA). Two other major LGBT-rights organizations which had filed Jane Doe v. Trump, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, joined the suit as co-counsels in October 2017.

<i>Karnoski v. Trump</i> Lawsuit filed on August 29, 2017

Karnoski v. Trump (2:17-cv-01297-MJP) is a lawsuit filed on August 29, 2017 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. The suit, like the similar suits Jane Doe v. Trump, Stone v. Trump, and Stockman v. Trump, seeks to block Trump and top Pentagon officials from implementing the proposed ban on military service for transgender people under the auspices of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment. The suit was filed on the behalf of three transgender plaintiffs, the Human Rights Campaign, and the Gender Justice League by Lambda Legal and OutServe-SLDN.

<i>Democratic National Committee v. Russian Federation</i>

Democratic National Committee v. Russian Federation, et al. was a civil lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Russian Federation, WikiLeaks and other entities and individuals. The case, relating to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, was filed on April 20, 2018. The DNC's complaint accused the Trump campaign of engaging in a racketeering enterprise in conjunction with Russia and WikiLeaks. The American Civil Liberties Union, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and others filed friend-of-the-court briefs expressing concern over the lawsuit's implications for freedom of the press.

Wolf v. Vidal, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a case that was filed to challenge the Trump Administration's rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Plaintiffs in the case are DACA recipients who argue that the rescission decision is unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment. On February 13, 2018, Judge Garaufis in the Eastern District of New York addressed the question of whether the government offered a legally adequate reason for ending the DACA program. The court found that Defendants did not provide a legally adequate reason for ending the DACA program and that the decision to end DACA was arbitrary and capricious. Defendants have appealed the decision to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

References

  1. "Abtan, et al. v. Prince, et al. and Albazzaz, et al. v. Prince, et al". Center for Constitutional Rights. Retrieved 2017-02-01.
  2. "ICD - Abtan et al. v. Prince et al. - Asser Institute". www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org. Retrieved 2017-02-01.
  3. Iraqi Report Says Blackwater Guards Fired First – New York Times
  4. Blackwater Denies Any Wrongdoing in Shooting Incident (Update1) – Bloomberg
  5. Estate of Abtan v. Blackwater Lodge & Training Ctr., 611F. Supp. 2d1 (D.D.C.2009).