Third Circuit Court Of Appeals Cuba Lawsuit: "Appellees’ wrongfully profiting from his usurped properties...Unjust enrichment." However, Plaintiff Inherited Property After Required Date.
/ROBERT M. GLEN V. EXPEDIA GROUP, INC., EXPEDIA GROUP, INC., TRIP ADVISOR LLC, TRIP ADVISOR, INC., ORBITZ, LLC, TRIP NETWORK, INC. D/B/A CHEAPTICKETS, KAYAK SOFTWARE CORPORATION, BOOKING HOLDINGS, INC., HOTELS.COM GP, LLC, HOTELS.COM L.P., TRAVELSCAPE LLC D/B/A TRAVELOCITY [1:19-cv-01809; Delaware District]
Reid Collins & Tsai (plaintiff)
Rosenthal, Monhait & Goddess, P.A. (plaintiff; law firm since closed; replaced by Andrews & Springer)
Ewusiak Law, P.A. (plaintiff)
Andrews & Springer (plaintiff)
Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell (defendant- Booking Holdings & Kayak Software Corporation)
Baker & McKenzie (defendant- Booking Holdings & Kayak Software Corporation)
Scott Douglass & McConnico (defendant- Expedia, Inc.; Expedia Group, Inc.; Hotels.com, L.P.; Hotels.com GP, LLC; Travelscape LLC d/b/a/ Travelocity; Orbitz, LLC; Trip Network, Inc. d/b/a/ Cheap Tickets)
Potter Anderson & Corroon (defendant- TripAdvisor)
Ballard Spahr LLP (defendant- Expedia, Inc.; Expedia Group, Inc.; Hotels.com, L.P.; Hotels.com GP, LLC; Travelscape LLC d/b/a/ Travelocity; Orbitz, LLC; Trip Network, Inc. d/b/a/ Cheap Tickets)
Cooch & Taylor, P.A. (amicus)
ROBERT M. GLEN V. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., [1:19-cv-23994 Southern Florida District; 4:20-cv-00482-A Transferred To Northern Texas District; 5th Circuit Court of Appeals 20-10903; 15 December 2021- Seeking Review From United States Supreme Court [Denied 1/18/22]
Reid Collins & Tsai (plaintiff)
Ewusiak Law, P.A. (plaintiff)
Jones Day (defendant)
Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP (defendant)
ROBERT M. GLEN VS. TRIPADVISOR LLC, TRIPADVISOR, INC., ORBITZ, LLC, TRIP NETWORK, INC. D/B/A CHEAPTICKETS, KAYAK SOFTWARE CORPORATION, BOOKING HOLDINGS, INC., EXPEDIA, INC., EXPEDIA GROUP, INC., HOTELS.COM, L.P., HOTELS.COM GP, LLC, and TRAVELSCAPE LLC D/B/A TRAVELOCITY [2:19-cv-01683; Nevada District] On 16 December 2019, plaintiff requested dismissal without prejudice, which was granted; action consolidated with 1:19-cv-01809 in Delaware District
Rice Reuther Sullivan & Carroll, LLC (plaintiff)
Reid Collins & Tsai LLP (plaintiff)
Andrews & Springer LLC (plaintiff)
Walden Macht & Haran (defendant- Trip Advisor)
Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP (defendant- Trip Advisor)
Scott Douglass McConnico (defendant- Expedia)
Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP (defendant- Booking)
Dubbin & Kravetz (amicus)
Baker McKenzie (defendant- Booking)
Ballard Spahr LLP (defendant- Expedia)
Morris James LLP (defendant- Booking)
Duane Morris LLP (defendant- Booking)
Cooch and Taylor, P.A. (amicus)
ROBERT M. GLEN V. EXPEDIA, INC.; EXPEDIA GROUP, INC.; HOTELS.COM, L.P.; AND HOTELS.COM GP, LLC [2:19-cv-01538; Washington Western District]
Pacifica Law Group LLP (plaintiff)
Reid Collins & Tsai LLP (plaintiff)
ROBERT M. GLEN V. VISA, INC., VISA U.S.A., INC., VISA INTERNATIONAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION, MASTERCARD INCORPORATED, MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED [1:19-cv-01870; Delaware District]
Reid Collins & Tsai LLP (plaintiff)
Andrews & Springer LLC (plaintiff)
Sidley Austin LLP (defendant- Mastercard)
Akerman (defendant- Visa)
Ballard Shahr LLP (defendant- Visa)
Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor (defendant- Mastercard)
CIVIL CASE DOCKETED. Notice filed by Appellant Robert M Glen in District Court No. 1-19-cv-01809. (CLW) [Entered: 04/30/2021 03:38 PM]
ORDER (Clerk) The actions at Nos. 21-1842 & 21-1843 are hereby consolidated for purposes of scheduling, the filing of a single brief, reply brief, and joint appendix by the appellant and for disposition. The appellees are encouraged to consult with one another regarding the contents of their briefs as the Court disfavors repetitive briefs. The appellees may choose to file a consolidated brief or join in or adopt portions by reference. See Fed. R. App.P. 28(i). [21-1842, 21-1843] SEE DOCKET FOR FULL TEXT OF ORDER (CLW) [Entered: 04/30/2021 05:33 PM]
Appellees Booking Holdings Inc, Expedia Group Inc, Expedia Inc, Hotels.com GP LLC, Hotels.com LP, Kayak Software Corp, Orbitz LLC, Travelscape LLC, Trip Advisor Inc, Trip Advisor LLC and Trip Network LLC in 21-1842, and Appellees Mastercard Incorporated, Mastercard International Inc, Visa Inc, Visa International Service Association and Visa USA Inc in 21-1843 verbally granted an extension of time to file brief until 12/02/2021 pursuant to Third Cir. LAR 31.4. [21-1842, 21-1843] (CJG) [Entered: 11/02/2021 01:43 PM]
Excerpts From Opinion:
Appellant Robert Glen challenges the District Court’s dismissal of his claims against Visa, Mastercard, and several online travel agencies under the Helms-Burton Act, 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(1). For the reasons that follow, we will affirm.
The Helms-Burton Act empowers United States nationals whose property has been confiscated by the Castro regime to recover damages from anyone who “traffics” in that property. § 6082(a)(1)(A). However, the Act limits eligible plaintiffs to those who “acquire[] ownership of the claim [to the confiscated property] before March 12, 1996.” § 6082(a)(4)(B). Glen contends that he satisfies this requirement because his aunt and mother acquired ownership in two beachfront properties prior to 1996 that the Castro regime eventually confiscated and developed into hotels. According to Glen, because he inherited those ownership interests upon the deaths of his aunt and mother in 1999 and 2011, respectively, he should also be the beneficiary of their acquisition dates.
Affirming the dismissal, the Fifth Circuit held that Glen actually did have Article III standing but agreed with the District Court that his acquisition date was the date of his inheritance, rendering him ineligible for relief under § 6082(a)(4)(B). Glen v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 7 F.4th 331, 336 (5th Cir. 2021). Glen then filed a petition for certiorari, which the United States Supreme Court denied. 142 S. Ct. 863 (2022).
In the meantime, in the underlying case here, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware also dismissed Glen’s case against Visa, Mastercard, and the travel agencies. In March 2021, before the Fifth Circuit issued its opinion, the District Court likewise ruled that Glen had standing, but that he acquired his ownership interests 4 upon inheriting them, i.e., after the statutory cut-off. Glen then filed this timely appeal.
Here, we agree with the Fifth Circuit that the harm Glen alleges—namely, Appellees’ wrongfully profiting from his usurped properties—“bears a close relationship to unjust enrichment, which has indisputable common-law roots.” Glen, 7 F.4th at 334. As our sister circuit observed, “[t]he Congressional findings of the Helms-Burton Act recognize as much, stating that the international judicial system ‘lacks fully effective remedies for the wrongful confiscation of property and for unjust enrichment from the use of wrongfully confiscated property.’”
On the merits, Glen contests the District Court’s interpretation of the HelmsBurton Act, but we do not reach his statutory arguments because the doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes him from relitigating them here. Collateral estoppel, also known as issue preclusion, prohibits “parties from relitigating an issue that has already been actually litigated” when the following criteria are met: “(1) the issue sought to be precluded [is] the same as that involved in the prior action; (2) that issue [was] actually litigated; (3) it [was] determined by a final and valid judgment; and (4) the determination [was] essential to the prior judgment.”
Because Glen’s statutory argument is collaterally estopped, his claims under the Helms-Burton Act fail on the merits and must be dismissed.
LINK To Opinion (8/18/22)
LINK To Judgement (8/18/22)
LINK To Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics