Skip to main content
E.D. New York· 1/29/2010

In Re Agape Litigation

Citations

  • 681 F. Supp. 2d 352

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that where a defendant bank “had no affirmative duty to detect and thwart [the] fraud[,] . . . [its] failure to act may not serve as the basis for claiming that [it] provided substantial assistance”
  • finding that the Bank Secrecy Act’s did not create a private right of action and therefore its monitoring requirements did not provide a basis for imposing a duty of care upon the defendant
  • “[B]ecause the Bank Secrecy Act does not create a private right of action, the Court can perceive no sound reason to recognize a duty of care that is predicated upon the statute’s monitoring requirements.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Spatt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

41 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named In Re Agape Litigation

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.