Fuld et al v. The Palestine Liberation Organization et al

Filing 62

CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 61 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of The Palestine Liberation Organization, The Palestinian Authority against Eliezer Yakir Fuld, Miriam Fuld, Naomi Fuld, Natan Shai Fuld, Tamar Gila Fuld. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDG ED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated January 6, 2022, and as in Waldman I, the killing of Ari Fuld was unquestionably horrific and Plaintiffs efforts to seek justice on his and their own behalf ar e morally compelling. 835 F.3d at 344. But, as the Second Circuit emphasized in its decision, the federal courts cannot exercise jurisdiction in a civil case beyond the limits prescribed by the due process clause of the Constitution, no matter how horrendous the underlying attacks or morally compelling the plaintiffs' claims. Id. at 344. The Court concludes that exercising jurisdiction here would indeed go beyond the limits prescribed by the Due Process Clause. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction must be and is GRANTED. As a result, the Court need not and does not reach Defendants' other arguments for dismissal; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 1/7/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km)

Download PDF
Case 1:20-cv-03374-JMF Document 62 Filed 01/07/22 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------X MIRIAM FULD et al., -against- Plaintiffs, 20 CIVIL 3374 (JMF) JUDGMENT THE PALESTINE LIBERATION ORGANIZATION et al., Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------X It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated January 6, 2022, and as in Waldman I, the killing of Ari Fuld was “unquestionably horrific” and Plaintiffs’ efforts to seek justice on his and their own behalf are morally compelling. 835 F.3d at 344. “But,” as the Second Circuit emphasized in its decision, “the federal courts cannot exercise jurisdiction in a civil case beyond the limits prescribed by the due process clause of the Constitution, no matter how horrendous the underlying attacks or morally compelling the plaintiffs’ claims.” Id. at 344. The Court concludes that exercising jurisdiction here would indeed go beyond the limits prescribed by the Due Process Clause. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction must be and is GRANTED. As a result, the Court need not and does not reach Defendants’ other arguments for dismissal; accordingly, the case is closed. Dated: New York, New York January 7, 2022 BY: RUBY J. KRAJICK _________________________ Clerk of Court _________________________ Deputy Clerk

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?