| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Judge Daniels
|
Professional succession |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001
|
Presiding judge |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005-01-01 | N/A | Opinion and Order issued | S.D.N.Y. | View |
This document is a page from a legal brief or opinion related to the litigation surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (In re: Terrorist Attacks). It argues against a district court's dismissal of claims, contending that defendants who provided material support to al-Qaeda through intermediaries or 'front charities' should be held liable under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). It specifically critiques the reasoning of Judge Daniels, comparing it to his predecessor Judge Casey, and cites various legal precedents regarding indirect support of terrorism.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity