Early Cases

The first reported case citing the ATS is Moxon v. The Fanny 17 F.Cas. 942 (D. Pa. 1793) (No. 9895) decided in 1793 which involved a libel action seeking restitution for a ship and its cargo taken in violation of the law of nations. The reference to the ATS was by implication, not by direct reference to the ATS.

Bolchos v. Darrel 3 F. Cas. 810 (D.C.S.C. 1795) (No. 1607) involved a lawsuit seeking restitution for the value of slaves taken from a captured Spanish ship. The district court recognized the plaintiff's right to seek compensation for a violation of substantive rights under the law of nations.

Between 1795 and 1979 the vast majority of cases that referenced the ATS did it in a cursory nature. The following cases are a good example of cases that referred to the ATS.

Huynh Thi Anh v. Levi, 586 F.2d 625 (6th Cir. 1979); Benjamins v. British European Airways, 572 F.2d 913 (2d Cir. 1978); Dreyfus v. Von Finck, 534 F.2d 24 (2d. Cir. 1976); Nguyen Da Yen v. Kissinger, 528 F.2d 1194 (9th Cir. 1975); IIT v. Vencap, Ltd., 519 F.2d 1001 (2d Cir. 1975); Abiodun v. Martin Oil Serv., Inc., 475 F.2d 142 (7th Cir. 1973); Valanga v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 259 F. Supp. 324 (E.D. Pa. 1966); Damaskinos v. Societa Navigacion Interamericana, S.A., Panama, 255 F. Supp. 919 (S.D.N.Y. 1966); Lopes v. Schroder, 225 F. Supp. 292 (E.D. Pa. 1963); Upper Lakes Shipping, Ltd. v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, 33 F.R.D. 348 (S.D.N.Y. 1963); Adra v. Clift, 195 F. Supp. 857 (D. Md. 1961); Khedivial Line, S.A.E. v Seafarers' Int'l Union, 278 F.2d 49 (2d Cir. 1960); O'Reilly DeCamara v. Brooke, 209 U.S. 45 (1908)