HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907.jpg

1.87 MB

Extraction Summary

1
People
4
Organizations
3
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal research / court case printout (westlaw)
File Size: 1.87 MB
Summary

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.

People (1)

Name Role Context
Two officials of Saudi Arabian government Defendants (implied)
Discussed in headnote [19] regarding personal jurisdiction and alleged funding of terrorism.

Organizations (4)

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.

Timeline (2 events)

Approx. 1989 (12 years before attacks)
Official's visit to the White House
White House
Saudi official
September 11, 2001
Terrorist Attacks
New York / US

Locations (3)

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.

Relationships (1)

Saudi Officials Alleged Funding/Support Terrorist Organizations
Headnote [19] discusses allegations of humanitarian relief funds providing support for terrorist organizations.

Key Quotes (3)

"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
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907.jpg
Quote #1
"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
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907.jpg
Quote #2
"alleged donations of money to established humanitarian organizations that might have been diverting funds to support terrorists"
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,965 characters)

In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 392 F.Supp.2d 539 (2005)
10 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 789
To establish personal jurisdiction based on a conspiracy theory under New York's long-arm statute, plaintiffs must make a prima facie showing of conspiracy and allege facts warranting an inference that defendant was a member of the conspiracy. NY.McKinney's CPLR 302(a)(2).
3 Cases that cite this headnote
[15] Conspiracy
Nature and Elements in General
Conspiracy
Pleading
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, (2) an overt act in furtherance of the agreement, (3) the parties' intentional participation in the furtherance of a plan or purpose, and (4) the resulting damage or injury.
Cases that cite this headnote
[16] Courts
Conspiracy and co-conspirators
To warrant the inference that a defendant was a member of the conspiracy, as would establish personal jurisdiction under New York's long-arm statute, plaintiffs must show that (1) defendant had an awareness of the effects in New York of its activity, (2) the activity of the co-conspirators in New York was to the benefit of the out-of-state conspirators, and (3) the co-conspirators acting in New York acted at the direction or under the control of or at the request of or on behalf of the out-of-state defendant. N.Y.McKinney's CPLR 302(a)(2).
3 Cases that cite this headnote
[17] Constitutional Law
Non-residents in general
The exercise of personal jurisdiction must comport with due process requirements, i.e., there must be minimum contacts and the exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 5, 14.
1 Cases that cite this headnote
[18] Federal Courts
Related contacts and activities; specific jurisdiction
Federal Courts
Business contacts and activities; transacting or doing business
Specific jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant exists when the forum exercises jurisdiction over the defendant in a suit arising out of defendant's contacts with that forum; general jurisdiction is based on a defendant's general business contacts with the forum.
Cases that cite this headnote
[19] Federal Courts
Terrorism
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, in action alleging their decisions regarding distribution of humanitarian relief funds provided support for terrorist organization responsible for September 11th attacks, despite alleged donations of money to established humanitarian organizations that might have been diverting funds to support terrorists and despite one official's visit to the White House twelve years before the attacks. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 12(b)(2), 28 U.S.C.A.
1 Cases that cite this headnote
WESTLAW © 2019 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.
4
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document