Dubai Islamic Bank v. Citibank, N.A.

How courts have described this case

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

• “That [defendant] Bank provided banking services— even with knowledge of the fraud — is not enough to state a claim under section 1962.”
• “[Plaintiff’s] allegations of the opening of accounts for [defendant] by [bank employees], transferring funds for [defendants] do not constitute exerting contro! over the enterprise.”
• “Leave to amend ‘should not be denied unless there is evidence of undue delay, bad faith, undue prejudice to the non-movant, or futility.’” (quoting Milanese v. Rust– Oleum Corp., 244 F.3d 104, 110 (2d Cir. 2001))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).