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
118] 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 mjury.
Cases that cite this headnote
(161 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
[7 Constitutional Law WESTLAW
[18]
[19]
Non-residents in general
The exercise of personal jurisdiction must comport with due process requirements, Le., 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
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
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
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907