HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017918.jpg
3.07 MB
Extraction Summary
2
People
4
Organizations
6
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document (court opinion page)
File Size:
3.07 MB
Summary
This document is a page from a 2005 court opinion regarding terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, specifically addressing the sovereign immunity of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Saudi High Commission (SHC), Prince Salman, and Prince Naif under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). The court discusses whether the 'torts exception' or 'commercial activities exception' to immunity applies, noting that the commercial activities exception is inappropriate and analyzing the requirements for the torts exception and the discretionary function rule. The text concludes that the defendants are considered foreign states for FSIA purposes when acting in official capacities and examines legal precedents regarding jurisdiction.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Prince Salman | ||
| Prince Naif |
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Kingdom of Saudi Arabia | ||
| SHC (Saudi High Commission) | ||
| Second Circuit | ||
| Thomson Reuters |
Timeline (1 events)
Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001
Relationships (3)
→
→
→
→
→
→
Key Quotes (3)
"Plaintiffs must demonstrate that an exception under the FSIA applies to their claims against SHC."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017918.jpg
Quote #1
"The allegations against Prince Salman, for example, center on his role as President of SHC... or as Governor of Riyadh"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017918.jpg
Quote #2
"The torts exception lifts immunity for “personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or any official ... of that foreign state while acting in the scope of his office.”"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017918.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document