Gill v. Arab Bank, PLC

How courts have described this case

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

• “Applying general principles of respondeat superior, it is essential that plaintiff can rely on that doctrine.... ”
• rejecting “the contention that any reckless contribution to a terrorist group or its affiliate, no matter how attenuated, will result in civil liability, without the demonstration of a proximate causal relationship to the plaintiffs injury”
• “[T]he burden should fall on [defendant] to prove that his associates were a military force if he wishes to invoke this ATA exclusion.”
• extensive discussion of facts and law under the applicable Antiterrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a)
• funds transferred in 2002 did not proximately cause injury to an American killed in 2008
• \But the fact that Central Bank dealt with an implied private right of action is irrelevant. Central Bank 's analysis did not distinguish between express rights of action and those that are implied.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Gill v. Arab Bank, PLC

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Gill v. Arab Bank, PLC
  E.D. New York· 2012-11-06· cited 17×
• Gill v. Arab Bank, PLC
  E.D. New York· 2012-10-19· cited 14×
• Gill v. Arab Bank, PLC
  E.D. New York· 2012-09-12· cited 4×