Fischer v. Magyar Államvasutak Zrt.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
777 F.3d 847 (2015)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Holocaust survivors and victims’ heirs (collectively, the victims) (plaintiffs) sued the Hungarian national railway, Hungarian national bank, and private banks, including Austrian bank Erste Group Bank AG (Erste) (defendants), seeking compensation for the expropriation of property from Hungarian Jews during World War II. In prior appeals, the Seventh Circuit held that the national entities could be sued in United States courts only if the victims had exhausted available Hungarian remedies or had a compelling reason for not doing so, dismissed the claims against two private banks for lack of personal jurisdiction, and denied Erste’s request for review of the denial of its dismissal motion. On remand, the district court held that the victims had not exhausted Hungarian remedies and dismissed the claims against the national entities. Erste, which consented to the Hungarian courts’ jurisdiction, was dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds. The victims appealed, arguing that Hungary’s law shifting fees to the loser made relief in Hungary too burdensome, the victims’ testimony was the most essential evidence in the case, and the victims would not sue the dismissed parties in Hungary. The U.S. executive branch submitted a statement of interest recommending dismissal of the claims against Erste.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hamilton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.
