Alperin v. Franciscan Order

Emil Alperin, other Holocaust survivors and their heirs, and related organizations (the survivors) (plaintiffs) brought an action alleging that the Ustasha regime, which the Nazis installed to rule Yugoslavia, persecuted Serbs, Jews, Roma, and others; committed genocide and war crimes; and looted victims’ property and deposited it in the Ustasha treasury. The claims were dismissed as presenting nonjusticiable political questions. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of claims alleging human-rights and international-law violations but remanded the claims for the recovery of property. The survivors filed an amended complaint alleging that after the war ended, the Order of Friars Minor (OFM) aided and abetted the Ustasha regime’s crimes. The claims were brought under the Alien Tort Statute, which gave federal district courts jurisdiction to hear tort claims by foreign nationals alleging international-law violations. The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, reasoning that (1) the survivors’ property-recovery claims did not involve international-law violations, and their human-rights claims presented nonjusticiable political questions; and (2) diversity jurisdiction was lacking because the action involved both foreign plaintiffs and a foreign defendant. The survivors moved to reopen the judgment so that they could amend the complaint and drop the foreign plaintiffs. The district court denied the motion, concluding that the survivors made a tactical decision to rely on the Alien Tort Statute instead of diversity jurisdiction and had no basis to reopen the judgment under applicable procedural rules. The survivors appealed and asked the appellate court to dismiss the foreign plaintiffs.