HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017831.jpg
2.09 MB
Extraction Summary
6
People
7
Organizations
4
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document (federal supplement / court opinion summary)
File Size:
2.09 MB
Summary
This document is a page from the Federal Supplement (349 F. Supp. 2d 766) summarizing legal holdings by Judge Casey regarding civil litigation stemming from the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The page outlines 17 specific holdings concerning jurisdiction, sovereign immunity (FSIA), and liability regarding claims brought by survivors and insurance carriers against Saudi Arabia, Saudi Princes, banks, and charities alleged to have supported Al Qaeda. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a congressional investigation, though the content specifically concerns 9/11 litigation rather than Jeffrey Epstein directly.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Casey, J. | Judge |
District Court Judge issuing the holdings.
|
| Saudi Arabian Prince(s) | Defendants |
Accused of contributing to charities supporting Al Qaeda; subject to jurisdictional rulings.
|
| Bank Chairman | Defendant |
Survivors made prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction over him.
|
| Founder of Saudi Arabian company | Defendant |
Survivors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over him.
|
| Director of charity | Defendant |
Survivors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over him.
|
| Taliban and al Qaeda leader | Terrorist Leaders |
Mentioned in context of decisions regarding their treatment.
|
Organizations (7)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Al Qaeda |
Terrorist organization sued by survivors.
|
|
| The District Court |
Court issuing the holdings.
|
|
| Multidistrict Litigation Panel |
Consolidated the actions.
|
|
| Saudi Arabian bank |
Subject of jurisdictional discovery regarding FSIA immunity.
|
|
| Saudi Arabian construction company |
Subject of jurisdictional discovery regarding activities in the US.
|
|
| Taliban |
Mentioned alongside Al Qaeda.
|
|
| Saudi Arabia |
Nation state defendant.
|
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in context of 'New York's long-arm statute'.
|
|
|
Home country of various defendants.
|
|
|
Jurisdictional context.
|
|
|
Mentioned regarding presence of charitable network entities.
|
Relationships (2)
Claims against Saudi Arabia arising from alleged decisions to make charitable contributions
Complaint alleging that Saudi Princes contributed to charities that supported al Qaeda
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (3,168 characters)
766 349 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES
ber 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, as well as insurance carriers, brought actions against al Qaeda, al Qaeda’s members and associates, alleged state sponsors of terrorism, and individuals and entities who allegedly provided support to Al Qaeda, asserting causes of action under Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), Antiterrorism Act (ATA), Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), as well as claims for aiding and abetting, conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, survival, wrongful death, trespass, and assault and battery. Actions were consolidated by Multidistrict Litigation Panel. Various defendants filed motions to dismiss.
Holdings: The District Court, Casey, J., held that:
(1) jurisdictional discovery was warranted on issue whether Saudi Arabian bank was immune under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA);
(2) claims against Saudi Arabia and two of its officials based on alleged contributions to charities were not subject to commercial activities exception of FSIA;
(3) complaint alleging that Saudi Princes contributed to charities that supported al Qaeda failed to allege causal connection sufficient to satisfy New York standard for concerted action liability, for purposes of torts exception of FSIA;
(4) claims against Saudi Arabian Prince arising from alleged contributions to charities were barred by discretionary function exception to torts exception of FSIA;
(5) claims against Saudi Arabian Prince arising from alleged decisions regarding treatment of Taliban and al Qaeda leader were barred by discretionary function exception to torts exception of FSIA;
(6) claims against Saudi Arabia arising from alleged decisions to make charitable contributions were barred by discretionary function exception to torts exception of FSIA;
(7) survivors failed to make prima facie showing necessary to establish personal jurisdiction over Princes and others under New York’s long-arm statute;
(8) modified due process standard appropriate for mass torts would not be applied to question of personal jurisdiction;
(9) allegations were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over Princes;
(10) survivors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over founder of Saudi Arabian company;
(11) limited discovery would be permitted with regard to whether Saudi Arabian bank’s contacts with United States were sufficient for exercise of personal jurisdiction;
(12) survivors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over director of charity;
(13) jurisdictional discovery was warranted to determine if Saudi Arabian construction company purposefully directed its activities at United States;
(14) jurisdictional discovery was warranted to determine which of charitable network’s entities had presence in Virginia, for purposes of personal jurisdiction;
(15) survivors made prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction over bank chairman;
(16) survivors failed to state cause of action under RICO;
(17) attacks were extreme and outrageous, as required for intentional infliction of emotional distress;
Holdings: The District Court, Casey, J., held that:
(1) jurisdictional discovery was warranted on issue whether Saudi Arabian bank was immune under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA);
(2) claims against Saudi Arabia and two of its officials based on alleged contributions to charities were not subject to commercial activities exception of FSIA;
(3) complaint alleging that Saudi Princes contributed to charities that supported al Qaeda failed to allege causal connection sufficient to satisfy New York standard for concerted action liability, for purposes of torts exception of FSIA;
(4) claims against Saudi Arabian Prince arising from alleged contributions to charities were barred by discretionary function exception to torts exception of FSIA;
(5) claims against Saudi Arabian Prince arising from alleged decisions regarding treatment of Taliban and al Qaeda leader were barred by discretionary function exception to torts exception of FSIA;
(6) claims against Saudi Arabia arising from alleged decisions to make charitable contributions were barred by discretionary function exception to torts exception of FSIA;
(7) survivors failed to make prima facie showing necessary to establish personal jurisdiction over Princes and others under New York’s long-arm statute;
(8) modified due process standard appropriate for mass torts would not be applied to question of personal jurisdiction;
(9) allegations were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over Princes;
(10) survivors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over founder of Saudi Arabian company;
(11) limited discovery would be permitted with regard to whether Saudi Arabian bank’s contacts with United States were sufficient for exercise of personal jurisdiction;
(12) survivors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over director of charity;
(13) jurisdictional discovery was warranted to determine if Saudi Arabian construction company purposefully directed its activities at United States;
(14) jurisdictional discovery was warranted to determine which of charitable network’s entities had presence in Virginia, for purposes of personal jurisdiction;
(15) survivors made prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction over bank chairman;
(16) survivors failed to state cause of action under RICO;
(17) attacks were extreme and outrageous, as required for intentional infliction of emotional distress;
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017831
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document