Blank v. Eavenson

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming dismissal on extraterritoriality grounds when the complaint failed to allege a “meaningful relationship” between the plaintiff’s injury and the defendant’s U.S.-listed securities
• “[S]imply alleging that some domestic conduct occurred cannot support a claim of domestic application because it is a rare case of prohibited extraterritorial application that lacks all contact with the territory of the United States.”
• “[S]imply alleging that some domestic conduct occurred cannot support a claim of domestic application because it is a rare case of prohibited extraterritorial application that lacks all contact with the territory of the United States.” (cleaned up)
• “Where Congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another section of the same Act, it is generally presumed that Congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusion.”
• “Where Congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another section of the same Act, it is generally presumed that Congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).