Yordanis Quintero-Gomez v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the general awareness element unmet where the complaint cited a “limited” number of news articles and the complaint failed to show that any of those articles were published prior to the attacks
• the Second Circuit held that “Plaintiffs’ aiding-and-abetting claim fails because the allegations do not support an inference that BLOM Bank was aware of the Three Customers’ ties with Hamas prior to the relevant attacks, thereby undermining the second element of general awareness.”
• “[A] Rule 12(b)(6) motion tests the adequacy of the complaint . . . not the briefs.” (alteration in original) (quoting Hack v. President & Fellows of Yale Coll., 237 F.3d 81, 91 (2d Cir. 2000), abrogated on other grounds by Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).