Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
996 F. Supp. 1239 (1997)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
United States citizens Mario Mañuel De la Peña and Carlos Alberto Costa piloted two civilian Cessna 337 aircraft on a humanitarian mission to search for possible distressed refugees in the waters between Cuba (defendant) and the United States. United States citizen Armando Alejandre and Cuban citizen Pablo Morales were passengers in the planes. Both Cessnas filed flight plans with United States and Cuban air-traffic controllers stating their intention to fly over international waters only. However, the Cuban Air Force (defendant) sent two armed MiG jets after the Cessnas. Well within the boundaries of international waters, without attempting to contact either Cessna or providing any type of notice, the MiG jets intentionally launched missiles at the Cessnas, destroying the planes and killing the four men. The families of Alejandre, De la Peña, and Costa (plaintiffs) sued Cuba and the Cuban Air Force in United States federal court. Claiming that the court did not have jurisdiction over them, neither Cuba nor the Cuban Air Force appeared in the lawsuit. At trial, evidence was presented establishing that (1) Cuba had been designated a state sponsor of terrorism, (2) the Cuban Air Force had intentionally shot down the Cessnas while acting under the Cuban government’s authority, (3) each family had suffered compensatory damages around $16 to $17 million, and (4) the Cuban Air Force had at least $4.59 billion in assets.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (King, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.