Burnett v. The Islamic Republic of Iran

Background

The decision concerns motions filed by certain Burnett and Ashton plaintiffs, and by Lisa Ortiz, for partial final default judgment against the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, collectively called the Iran Defendants. The motions sought judgments concerning liability and damages for injuries connected to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The decision also addressed a February 19, 2025 report and recommendation by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn. No party objected to that report.

Jurisdiction and Default

The court adopted the recommendation after reviewing it for clear error and finding none. It held that it had subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the Iran Defendants. For U.S. national plaintiffs, the court relied on the terrorism exception in 28 U.S.C. § 1605A. For certain non-U.S. national plaintiffs, it held that 28 U.S.C. § 1605B(b) applied as an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. The court also found that service of process was properly completed under 28 U.S.C. § 1608(a)(4) and § 1608(b)(3).

The Iran Defendants did not serve an answer or another responsive pleading within the required period after service. The Clerk of Court therefore entered certificates of default. The court held that the Iran Defendants had defaulted.

Liability

The court noted that liability had already been decided against the Iran Defendants as to the U.S. national Burnett plaintiffs under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c). It also held Iran liable to Lisa Ortiz, a U.S. national, under § 1605A based on evidence considered in an earlier decision.

For the non-U.S. national Burnett plaintiffs, the court held that they could proceed under § 1605B(b) and New York tort law. Applying New York law, the court concluded that the plaintiffs established claims for assault and battery and that the Iran Defendants aided and abetted the September 11 attacks. The court defined civil assault as intentionally placing another person in fear of imminent harmful or offensive contact, and civil battery as intentional, wrongful physical contact without consent.

The court denied the Ashton plaintiff’s claim under § 1605A without prejudice because she was a non-U.S. national and had not identified a proper cause of action. The order gave her leave to amend and refile the motion with a different legal basis.

Damages and Disposition

The court approved the personal-injury damages framework previously adopted in the multidistrict litigation. It awarded the plaintiffs identified in Exhibits A and B the pain-and-suffering damages listed there, including a $12,000,000 award for Felipe David based on burns, a six-week coma, a lengthy hospital stay, years of physical therapy, and continuing care. The court also approved a reduction in damages for Anthony Ciarnella.

The court awarded prejudgment interest at 4.96% per year, compounded annually, from September 11, 2001, through the date of judgment. It entered a partial final default judgment against Iran for Lisa Ortiz and a partial final default judgment for the Burnett plaintiffs identified in Exhibits A and B against the Iran Defendants. Those plaintiffs may later seek punitive or other damages consistent with future court rulings, and plaintiffs not listed in the exhibits may later seek damage awards to the extent they have not already done so.

The court denied the Ashton plaintiff’s motion without prejudice, with leave to amend, and granted the Burnett and Ortiz plaintiffs’ motions.