Skip Navigation LinksHome > Clinical Programs > Human Trafficking Cases > Case Display

Case View

 

 Case Documents

 
There are no documents to display for this case.

 

 Case Links - links to external documents

 
Link to Document

 
Case Details

  
CASE NAME:John Roe I v. Bridgestone Corporation
ALL PLAINTIFFS:JOHN ROE I, JOHN ROE II, JOHN ROE III, JOHN ROE IV, JOHN ROE V, JOHN ROE VI, JOHN ROE VII, JOHN ROE VIII, JOHN ROE IX, JOHN ROE X, JOHN ROE XI, JOHN ROE XII, JAMES ROE I, JAMES ROE II, JAMES ROE III, JAMES ROE IV, JAMES ROE V, JAMES ROE VI, JAMES ROE VII, JAMES ROE VIII, JAMES ROE IX, JAMES ROE X, JAMES ROE XI, JAMES ROE XII, JAMES ROE XIII, JAMES ROE XIV, JAMES ROE XV, JANE ROE I, JANE ROE II, JANE ROE III, JANE ROE IV, JANE ROE V, JANE ROE VI, JANE ROE VII, JANE ROE VIII,
ALL DEFENDANTS:Bridgestone Americas Holding Inc., Bridgestone Firestone North American Tire LLC, BFS Diversified Products, Firestone Natural Rubber Company.
CITATION:
DOCKET NUMBER:1:06-cv-0627-DFH-JMS
SOURCE:Lexis Search
TYPE OF CASE:Civil
RELATED CASE CITATION:
TYPE OF TRIAL:Judge
TRIAL JUDGE(S):Jane Magnus-Stinson
YEAR OF ARREST:
YEAR OF VERDICT:
TYPE OF COURT:Federal
STATE:Indiana
FEDERAL DISTRICT:District Court
STATE COUNTY:
AGE OF VICTIM(S):Adult and Minor
NUMBER OF VICTIMS:200 +
GENDER OF VICTIM(S):Female and Male
VICTIM'S COUNTRY OF ORIGIN:Liberia
METHOD OF ENTRY INTO THE U.S.:
WAS VICTIM CHARGED WITH A CRIME:No
NUMBER OF DEFENDANT(S):20
GENDER OF DEFENDANT(S):Female and Male
TYPE OF INDUSTRY:Labor
CASE CATEGORIZATION:Agricultural Industry
FIRST CHARGE:
FIRST CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIRST CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FIRST CHARGE SENTENCE:
SECOND CHARGE:
SECOND CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
SECOND CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
SECOND CHARGE SENTENCE:
THIRD CHARGE:
THIRD CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
THIRD CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
THIRD CHARGE SENTENCE:
FOURTH CHARGE:
FOURTH CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FOURTH CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FOURTH CHARGE SENTENCE:
FIFTH CHARGE:
FIFTH CHARGE US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIFTH CHARGE VERDICT/PLEA:
FIFTH CHARGE SENTENCE:
CORE TERMS:
SENTENCING OPINION CITATION:
LENGTH OF GREATEST SENTENCE:
RESTITUTION REQUIRED:
FINE IMPOSED:
FORFEITURE IMPOSED:
FIRST CLAIM:Violation of Alien Tort Statute (ATS)
FIRST CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:28 U.S.C.S. § 1350
FIRST CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FIRST CLAIM:TBD
SECOND CLAIM:18 U.S.C. § 1595
SECOND CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:18 U.S.C. § 1595
SECOND CLAIM RESULT:Dismissed
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR SECOND CLAIM:
THIRD CLAIM:Violation of thirteenth Amendment of the constitution
THIRD CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
THIRD CLAIM RESULT:Dismissed
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR THIRD CLAIM:
FOURTH CLAIM:
FOURTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FOURTH CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FOURTH CLAIM:
FIFTH CLAIM:
FIFTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
FIFTH CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR FIFTH CLAIM:
SIXTH CLAIM:
SIXTH CLAIM US/STATE CODE CITATION:
SIXTH CLAIM RESULT:
DAMAGES AWARDED FOR SIXTH CLAIM:
TOTAL AWARD:
APPEAL:
EXPLANATION OF APPEAL:
APPELLATE OPINION CITATION:2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19010, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44535, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49336,
HOLDING OF APPEALS COURT:
APPEAL STILL PENDING?:
SUMMARY:Plaintiffs, a class of children and young adults, filed suit against the Bridgestone corporations and it's representatives. Plaintiffs claimed that were compelled to work on rubber plantations in Liberia, in violation of child labor laws. The children had to work to fullfill the quotas assigned to their parents and families and the managers of the plantations knew the children were working according to the plaintiffs. Defendants claim they have rules against child labor and the quotas can be fullfilled without child labor.
Approval Status:Approved
Approver Comments:
            
EDIT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Michigan Law Wordmark Print View