Luis Alberto GALVIS MUJICA, on behalf of himself and as representative of the Estates of Tereza Mujica Hernan, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra; Mario Galvis Gelvez, on behalf of himself, individually, and as heir of the decedents Tereza Mujica Hernandez, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra; John Mario Galvis Mujica, through his guardian ad litum and on behalf of himself, individually, and as heir of the decedents Terza Mujica Hernandez, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION; Airscan Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
Luis Alberto Galvis Mujica, on behalf of himself and as representative of the Estates of Tereza Mujica Hernan, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra; Mario Galvis Gelvez, on behalf of himself, individually, and as heir of the decedents Tereza Mujica Hernandez, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra; John Mario Galvis Mujica, through his guardian ad litum and on behalf of himself, individually, and as heir of the decedents Terza Mujica Hernandez, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Defendant-Appellant, and
Airscan Inc., Defendant.
Luis Alberto Galvis Mujica, on behalf of himself and as representative of the Estates of Tereza Mujica Hernan, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra; Mario Galvis Gelvez, on behalf of himself, individually, and as heir of the decedents Tereza Mujica Hernandez, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra; John Mario Galvis Mujica, through his guardian ad litum and on behalf of himself, individually, and as heir of the decedents Terza Mujica Hernandez, Edilma Leal Pacheco and Johanny Hernandez Becerra, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Defendant-Appellant, and
Airscan Inc., Defendant.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued and Submitted April 19, 2007.
Submission Deferred August 23, 2007.
Resubmitted May 11, 2009.
Filed May 11, 2009.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Bridget Arimond and Douglas W. Cassel, Center for International Human Rights, Northwestern University Law School, Chicago, IL; Terry Collingsworth, International Labor Rights Fund, Washington, D.C.; Paul L. Hoffman, Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow Harris & Hoffman, Venice, CA; Daniel M. Kovalik, Pittsburgh, PA, for the plaintiffs-appellants.
Manuel F. Cachn, Daniel P. Collins, Daniel L. Geyser, and John W. Spiegel, Munger, Tolles & Olson, Los Angeles, CA; Kristin Linsley Myles, Munger, Tolles & Olson, San Francisco, CA, for defendant/appellee/cross-appellant Occidental Petroleum Corporation.
Kenneth J. Berke, Berke & Kent, Calabasas, CA; Sara M. Fotopulos and Thomas E. Fotopulos, Fotopulos & Fotopulos, Riverview, FL, for defendant/appellee/cross-appellant Airscan, Inc.
Marco B. Simons and Richard L. Herz, Earthrights International, Washington, D.C., for the amicus Earthrights International.
William J. Aceves, California Western School of Law, San Diego, CA; Sarah H. Cleveland, Columbia Law School, New York, NY; William S. Dodge, University of California, Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco, CA, for the amicus Constitutional and International Law Professors.
Ralph G. Steinhardt, George Washington University School of Law, Washington, D.C., for the amicus International Law Scholars.
Tyler Giannini, Cambridge, MA, for the amicus U.S. Career Foreign Service Diplomats.
John B. Bellinger, III, Gregory Katsas, Douglas N. Letter, Robert M. Loeb, Sharon Swingle, and Debra Wong Yang, for the amicus The United States.
Before JEROME FARRIS and RONALD M. GOULD, Circuit Judges, and KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, Senior District Judge.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
ORDER
In light of the intervening authority of Sarei v. Rio Tinto,550 F.3d 822 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc), this case is remanded to the district court to consider whether a prudential exhaustion requirement applies in this case, and if so, whether that requirement bars any claims in this case. On remand, the district court should also consider the effect, if any, of the decision of the Council of State of the Republic of Colombia...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
