Doe v. Unocal
Encyclopedia
Doe
v. Unocal, 248 F.3d 915 (9th Cir.
2001) was a lawsuit filed against Unocal for alleged human rights violations.
in Myanmar
, formerly Burma.
, Paul Hoffman, Hadsell & Stormer, and Judith Brown Chomsky served as co-counsel to the plaintiffs.
In 1997, a U.S. federal district court in Los Angeles agreed to hear Doe v. Unocal. The Court ruled that corporations and their executive officers can be held legally responsible under the Alien Tort Claims Act for violations of international human rights norms in foreign countries, and that U.S. courts have the authority to adjudicate such claims. The Court dismissed the case on the grounds that Unocal could not be held liable unless Unocal wanted the military to commit abuses, and that plaintiffs had not made this showing.
Plaintiffs appealed this decision, and on September 18, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
reversed the District Court’s decision allowing the lawsuit against Unocal to go forward.
In February 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court
decided to rehear the appeal before an eleven-judge en banc panel.
In December 2004, Unocal agreed to settle after a motion for summary judgment
failed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California
. The settlement will compensate plaintiffs and provide funds enabling plaintiffs and their representatives to develop programs to improve living conditions, health care and education and protect the rights of people from the pipeline region.
John Doe
The name "John Doe" is used as a placeholder name in a legal action, case or discussion for a male party, whose true identity is unknown or must be withheld for legal reasons. The name is also used to refer to a male corpse or hospital patient whose identity is unknown...
v. Unocal, 248 F.3d 915 (9th Cir.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a U.S. federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* District of Alaska* District of Arizona...
2001) was a lawsuit filed against Unocal for alleged human rights violations.
Events
In September 1997, 13 Burmese villagers filed suit against Unocal and their parent company, the Union Oil Company of California under the Alien Tort Claims Act. The suit was filed for alleged human rights violations, including forced labor, in the construction of the Yadana gas pipeline projectYadana Project
The Yadana gas field is an offshore gas field in the Andaman Sea. It is located about offshore to the nearest landfall in Myanmar.-Description:...
in Myanmar
Myanmar
Burma , officially the Republic of the Union of Myanmar , is a country in Southeast Asia. Burma is bordered by China on the northeast, Laos on the east, Thailand on the southeast, Bangladesh on the west, India on the northwest, the Bay of Bengal to the southwest, and the Andaman Sea on the south....
, formerly Burma.
Case
EarthRights International, the Center for Constitutional RightsCenter for Constitutional Rights
Al Odah v. United States:Al Odah is the latest in a series of habeas corpus petitions on behalf of people imprisoned at the Guantanamo Bay detention center. The case challenges the Military Commissions system’s suitability as a habeas corpus substitute and the legality, in general, of detention at...
, Paul Hoffman, Hadsell & Stormer, and Judith Brown Chomsky served as co-counsel to the plaintiffs.
In 1997, a U.S. federal district court in Los Angeles agreed to hear Doe v. Unocal. The Court ruled that corporations and their executive officers can be held legally responsible under the Alien Tort Claims Act for violations of international human rights norms in foreign countries, and that U.S. courts have the authority to adjudicate such claims. The Court dismissed the case on the grounds that Unocal could not be held liable unless Unocal wanted the military to commit abuses, and that plaintiffs had not made this showing.
Plaintiffs appealed this decision, and on September 18, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a U.S. federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* District of Alaska* District of Arizona...
reversed the District Court’s decision allowing the lawsuit against Unocal to go forward.
In February 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a U.S. federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* District of Alaska* District of Arizona...
decided to rehear the appeal before an eleven-judge en banc panel.
In December 2004, Unocal agreed to settle after a motion for summary judgment
Motion (legal)
In law, a motion is a procedural device to bring a limited, contested issue before a court for decision. A motion may be thought of as a request to the judge to make a decision about the case. Motions may be made at any point in administrative, criminal or civil proceedings, although that right is...
failed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California
United States District Court for the Central District of California
The United States District Court for the Central District of California serves over 18 million people in southern and central California, making it the largest federal judicial district by population...
. The settlement will compensate plaintiffs and provide funds enabling plaintiffs and their representatives to develop programs to improve living conditions, health care and education and protect the rights of people from the pipeline region.