Burger-Fischer v. Degussa
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
65 F. Supp. 2d 248 (1999)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Holocaust victims and their representatives (the victims) (plaintiffs) brought class actions against German corporations Degussa AG and Siemens AG (the corporations) (defendants), alleging that the corporations violated customary international law and German civil law by participating in and profiting from the Nazi regime’s atrocities. The victims sought (1) damages or restitution for gold valuables and jewelry, dental gold, and other precious metals that Degussa refined for the Nazi regime knowing the metals had been seized from Jews before transportation to, upon arrival at, or after being killed in concentration camps; (2) damages for the Zyklon B Degussa manufactured knowing it would be used in concentration-camp gas chambers; and (3) compensation and damages from both corporations for forcing the victims to provide slave labor and live and work in inhumane conditions knowing the slave-labor program was organized by the Nazi government to advance its war effort and goal of exterminating Jews. The corporations moved to dismiss the claims on grounds, among others, that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the victims’ war-related claims. The corporations maintained that the victims’ claims were subsumed or intended to be subsumed by the various post-World War II agreements and treaties concerning reparations.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Debevoise, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 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.