Amidax Trading Group v. S.W.I.F.T. SCRL

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that if a “conclusory allegation in the complaint conflicts with a statement made in a document 6 In Landon v. Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., 22 N.Y.3d 1 (2013
• “On their face, it is doubtful that these two speculative and conjectural assertions could suffice to establish that the government obtained Amidax’s financial information from [the] SWIFT.”
• “Where a conclusory allegation in the complaint conflicts with a statement made in a document attached to the complaint, the document controls and the allegation is not accepted as true.”
• “Where a conclusory allegation in the complaint conflicts with a statement made in a document attached to the complaint, the document controls and the allegation is not accepted as true.”
• “Where a conclusory allegation in the complaint conflicts with a statement made in a document attached to the complaint, the document controls and the allegation is not accepted as true.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).