This document is a page from a Westlaw legal research printout regarding the case 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' (392 F.Supp.2d 539). The page lists legal headnotes defining the standards for personal jurisdiction, conspiracy pleading requirements under New York law, and specific federal jurisdiction rulings concerning Saudi Arabian officials accused of funding terrorism through humanitarian channels. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907' stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a House Oversight Committee investigation.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Two officials of Saudi Arabian government | Defendants (implied) |
Discussed in headnote [19] regarding personal jurisdiction and alleged funding of terrorism.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabian government |
Officials from this government mentioned in headnote [19].
|
|
| Thomson Reuters/Westlaw |
Publisher of the legal document.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp.
|
|
| Federal Courts |
Jurisdiction discussed throughout.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Referenced regarding 'New York's long-arm statute' and conspiracy laws.
|
|
|
Jurisdiction context.
|
|
|
Mentioned in headnote [19] regarding a visit by a Saudi official.
|
"To plead a valid cause of action for conspiracy, a plaintiff must allege the primary tort and four elements: (1) a corrupt agreement between two or more persons..."Source
"Two officials of Saudi Arabian government did not have such minimum contacts with the United States as to support a finding of general personal jurisdiction..."Source
"alleged donations of money to established humanitarian organizations that might have been diverting funds to support terrorists"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (2,965 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document