Fawwaz Zedan v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a “recruitment phone call, in which no contract [was] agreed upon,” cannot satisfy substantial-contact requirement
• clarifying that the degree of contact required must be more than isolated or transitory, and a plaintiff’s mere citizenship status or place of residence will not suffice
• explaining that the plaintiff’s suit was not based “upon an act performed in the United States,” but upon a contract entered into in Saudi Arabia, which was breached
• suggesting that entering into a contractual agreement at a meeting, “one part of which is to be performed in the United States,” would constitute substantial contacts with the United States
• financial loss in United States must be accompanied by \something legally significant\ that happened in the United States for FSIA jurisdiction to attach
• “[A] contractual arrangement, one part of which is to be performed in the United States, constitutes a substantial contact with the United States.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).