Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Dames & Moore v. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury

453 U.S. 654 (1981)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...

Dames & Moore v. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury

United States Supreme Court

453 U.S. 654 (1981)

Play video


On November 4, 1979, the Iranian hostage crisis began when the American Embassy in Tehran, Iran was seized. In response, President Carter, acting pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), declared a national emergency and issued an executive order that froze all Iranian assets in the United States. Carter's administration also ordered that lawsuits against Iranian interests in U.S. courts could not proceed without the administration's approval. The administration granted a license for lawsuits against Iranian interests, which allowed prejudgment attachment of property but not final judgments. Pursuant to that license, Dames & Moore (plaintiff) sued Iran's Atomic Energy Organization (AEO) for failing to pay Dames & Moore for work it had done on an Iranian nuclear-power plant. On January 20, 1981, the American hostages in Iran were released pursuant to an agreement reached between the United States and Iran. The agreement stated that the U.S. government would seek to end all pending litigation against Iran by referring cases to an Iran-United States claims tribunal that was established to facilitate settlements. President Reagan subsequently issued an executive order requiring the transfer of all pending cases to the tribunal and ordering the transfer of Iranian assets to the Federal Reserve Bank to be controlled by the U.S. Treasury for settlement purposes. After the issuance of the executive order, the district court stayed a final judgment in Dames & Moore's favor in its action against the AEO. On April 28, 1981, Dames & Moore sued U.S. Government officials including the Secretary of the Treasury (defendant), seeking to prevent enforcement of the president's executive order and Treasury Department regulations implementing the new agreement with Iran. The district court dismissed the action, and the United States Supreme Court granted Dames & Moore's petition to review the case.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 517,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Questions and answers

What cases would be similar to this one, in that this ruling had an affect on future cases? And, are there any similar cases prior to this one?

I am just interested to know if there are any similar cases both prior to and after this case.

Want to see this answer?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and get access to all answers in our Q&A database

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial

Tempor minim nulla id mollit ullamco consequat aliquip adipisicing irure officia tempor. Magna sit eiusmod laborum proident laboris ex sunt. Non labore ex officia irure qui et laboris aliqua in minim. Labore velit aliqua proident officia cillum occaecat dolore tempor. Ullamco in consequat labore amet laborum proident reprehenderit anim cillum excepteur. Elit do nostrud nisi excepteur sit dolor pariatur fugiat. Nisi incididunt incididunt do est velit excepteur enim excepteur incididunt mollit pariatur. Irure tempor non in esse do. Laboris eiusmod in ad ut enim est duis ad sint veniam eiusmod. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt.