Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
882 F.3d 314 *; 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3171 **; 2018 WL 797454
LINDE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. ARAB BANK, PLC, Defendant-Appellant.1
Prior History: [**1] On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Defendant Arab Bank, PLC, appeals from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Cogan, J.), in the stipulated total amount of $100,000,000 following a jury verdict holding the bank liable under the Antiterrorism Act ("ATA"), see 18 U.S.C. § 2333, for injuries sustained by plaintiffs or their relatives during terrorist attacks in Israel conducted by Hamas. Arab Bank argues that (1) the jury was not properly instructed on the "international terrorism" element of an ATA claim, (2) the bank was prejudiced by unwarranted discovery sanctions affecting the presentation of evidence, and (3) the trial evidence was legally insufficient to prove causation. We agree that instructional error requires vacatur and remand. We are not persuaded to affirm by plaintiffs' argument that the error is rendered harmless by either the jury's finding of causation or Congress's post-trial enactment of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act ("JASTA"), Pub. L. No. 144-222, 130 Stat. 854 (Sept. 28, 2016) (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d)(2)). Nor are we persuaded to reverse by Arab Bank's sufficiency challenge to proof of causation. A settlement agreement between [**2] the parties forgoing retrial in the event of vacatur and remand makes it unnecessary for us to decide whether the bank's challenges to the causation charge or the district court's discovery sanctions also warrant vacatur and remand.
Linde v. Arab Bank, PLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155567 (E.D.N.Y., May 24, 2016)
Disposition: VACATED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
international terrorism, causation, aiding and abetting, district court, parties, terrorist, financial services, intimidate, matter of law, plaintiffs', vacatur, settlement agreement, charging, proximate, violence, attacks, coerce, terrorist organization, instructional error, terrorism, civilian, harmless, damages, quotation, but-for, vacate, marks, apparent intent, human life, new trial
Criminal Law & Procedure, Terrorism, Support of Terrorist Organizations, Elements, International Law, Individuals & Sovereign States, Human Rights, Terrorism, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Appellate Jurisdiction, Final Judgment Rule, Judgments, Entry of Judgments, Multiple Claims & Parties, Constitutional Law, Case or Controversy, Standing, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Relief From Judgments, Motions for New Trials, Jury Trials, Jury Instructions, Objections, Harmless & Invited Errors, Harmless Error Rule, Torts, Multiple Defendants, Concerted Action, Civil Aiding & Abetting