More Early ATS cases

In Upper Lakes Shipping LTD. v International Longshoremen's Association 33 F.R.D. 348 (S.D.N.Y. 1953) the Plaintiff a Canadian shipping company sued the defendant contending that the defendant was maliciously interfering with plaintiff's business and collective bargaining agreement with the Canadian Maritime Union. Plaintiff believed that defendants violated a treaty between the United States and Canada from 1909 concerning the boundary waters between the two States. Even though there was a treaty and it was potentially violated the court did not get jurisdiciton under the ATS because the sole remedy under the treaty was to pursue the case at the International Joint

In Lopes v. Reederei Richard Schroder 225 F.Supp. 292 (E.D. Pa. 1963) the plaintiff contended that unseaworthiness and negligence a tort committed in the violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. The court held that the doctrine of unseaworthiness was judicially created and unique to the United States, therefore it was not part of the law of nations. Since it was unique to the United States, the United States could not be a party to a treaty holding that unseaworthiness was illegal. The court futher held that negligence does not fall under the category of violating the law of nations. Lopes v. Reederei Richard Schroder has an excellent recounting of jurist work regarding the language of the ATS. Id. at 296-297.

In Damaskinos v. Societa Navigacion Interamericana, S.A., Panama 225 F.Supp. 919 (S.D.N.Y. 1966) the court held that negligence in providing a seaman a safe place to work does not fall under the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. The Plaintif was an alien from Greece who signed a contract in Greece for employment on a Lebanon vessel. The contract contained the controlling law, and the court held that Greek law was the proper authority. The treaty relied upon by Plaintiff only gives the plaintiff the right to be heard in a U.S. court, it does not create an enforceable right. Therefore the case was dismissed.

In Valanga v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 259 F.Supp 324 (D.C. Pa. 1966) the court held that it was not a violation of the laws of nations for an insurance provider to not pay proceeds on a plan. Since this was a cause of action fo breach of contract the court was unwilling to accept Plaintiffs contention that it was a tort in violation of the law of nations. The case was dismissed.