Boim v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Boim III)
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
549 F.3d 685 (2008)
Facts
Section 2333 of the Anti-Terrorism Act provides a private right of action for any United States national, or the United States national's estate, injured by an act of international terrorism. Section 2331(1) of the act defines "international terrorism" as (1) violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate criminal laws of the United States, (2) intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or influence government conduct or policy by such intimidation or coercion, and (3) occur outside the United States. David Boim, a Jewish citizen of both the United States and Israel, was targeted and killed by two members of Hamas in Israel. At the time of Boim's death, Hamas was an organization engaged in terrorism. Hamas also provided social welfare services to Hamas supporters, including health services and education. Boim's parents (plaintiffs) brought suit against various entities, including Salah, the Holy Land Foundation, American Muslim Society, and Quranic Literacy Institute (defendants), contending that the groups were liable under the act for providing financial services to Hamas prior to Boim's death. The district court found all defendants jointly and severally liable, awarding Boim's parents $156 million in treble damages. The defendants appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Rovner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 709,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
