In Re Agape Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the “actual knowledge element of a claim for aiding and abetting is a distinct requirement from the scienter required to allege the underlying fraud”
• commingling of investor funds showed at most constructive knowledge of fraud even where bank employees “actually saw” the account activity
• stating the elements of aiding and abetting fraud under New York law, and further stating that New York law requires the complaint to set forth allegations that the defendant have actual knowledge of the fraud
• claims for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty and conversion each require allegations of actual knowledge of the principal’s breach
• “[W]hile a visual representation of the account activity and actual dollar amounts in hindsight may suggest that the fraud was obvious, ... the Court can only infer that-this information raises an inference of BOA’s constructive knowledge of the fraud.”
• “It is well-settled that a plaintiff cannot amend the complaint through briefs and affidavits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).