Second Circuit Revives Claims Against Saudi Bank Accused of Aiding 9/11 Attacks
Previous lawsuits against Saudi officials had failed to establish personal jurisdiction because the Second Circuit found that allegations of indirect funding were not enough to establish "intentional conduct" aimed at U.S. residents.
October 15, 2019 at 05:31 PM
3 minute read
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on Tuesday revived a civil lawsuit accusing Saudi Arabian Al Rajhi Bank of aiding al-Qaida in carrying out the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and directed a lower court to conduct discovery on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the claims.
The ruling, outlined in a summary order by a three-judge panel of the Manhattan-based appeals court, came as part of a long-running multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to hold Saudi Arabia, its agents and largest Islamic bank liable for the attacks, which killed 3,000 people in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C.
U.S. District Judge George Daniels last year allowed discovery to proceed against the country, but dismissed claims against Al Rajhi and refused the plaintiff's request for jurisdictional discovery.
A host of individuals and U.S. businesses argued that the district court had jurisdiction over their claims because Al Rajhi had either provided financial support to al-Qaida or engaged in a conspiracy to target U.S. interests. According to the suit, the bank funneled money and other aid to groups that it knew provided financial support to al-Qaida and extremist operatives.
Previous lawsuits against Saudi officials had failed to establish personal jurisdiction because the Second Circuit found that allegations of indirect funding were not enough to establish "intentional conduct" aimed at U.S. residents.
The panel, however, said allegations of Al Rajhi's "specific intent" to further al-Qaida's attacks distinguished the case from those efforts and ordered Daniels to begin discovery of the jurisdictional issues at play.
"Construing all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiffs-appellants, the support alleged here, in conjunction with this specific intent, we believe is 'more direct and one step closer to al Qaeda' when compared to the support we have previously found inadequate," the order said.
According to the ruling, discovery would involve what kind of alleged support may have been provided, whether it had been earmarked for certain purposes and how specifically Al Rajhi was "involved in the process of providing support to al Qaeda."
Sean Carter, co-chair of the plaintiffs executive committee, said the ruling was an "important step" toward ultimately holding the bank responsible for its role in the attacks.
"Since 2003, we've been pursuing these claims to get answers concerning any Saudi involvement in the rise of al-Qaida and the involvement of the Saudi government," said Carter, a member of Cozen O'Connor in Philadelphia.
"This is the first time we've ever had a chance to conduct discovery of Al Rajhi," he said.
Christopher Curran, a partner with White & Case who is representing the bank, did not immediately return a call Tuesday afternoon seeking comment on the ruling.
The case is captioned In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
Read More:
White & Case Rebuffs Two Suits by Terrorism Victims
Circuit Rejects Most Allegations Overseas Groups Aided al Qaeda
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe CFPB Is Digging In for Last Days of Biden's Term. But What Happens Next?
6 minute readNY AG James Targets Crypto Fraud Which Allegedly Ensnared Victims With Fake Jobs
4 minute read'Merciless' Filing Deadline Dooms Cuban Americans' Property-Trafficking Suit Against BNP Paribas, SocGen
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1St. Jude Labs Sued for $14.3M for Allegedly Falling Short of Purchase Expectations
- 2'Ridiculously Busy': Several Law Firms Position Themselves as Go-To Experts on Trump’s Executive Orders
- 3States Reach New $7.4B Opioid Deal With Purdue After SCOTUS Ruling
- 4$975,000 Settlement Reached After Fall on Sidewalk
- 5'Where Were the Lawyers?' Judge Blocks Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250