O'Neill v. Al Rajhi Bank

CourtU.S. Supreme Court
CitationO'Neill v. Al Rajhi Bank, 134 S.Ct. 2870, 189 L.Ed.2d 848, 573 U.S. 954 (2014)
Decision Date30 June 2014
Docket NumberNo. 13–318.,13–318.
Parties John Patrick O'NEILL, Jr., et al., petitioners, v. AL RAJHI BANK, et al.; and John Patrick O'Neill, Jr., et al., petitioners, v. Asat Trust Reg., et al.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Dix v. Peters
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • March 20, 2019
    ..." In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 , 714 F.3d 659, 673 (2d Cir. 2013), cert. denied sub nom O'Neill v. Al Rajhi Bank , 573 U.S. 954, 134 S.Ct. 2870, 189 L.Ed.2d 848 (2014) (quoting Chloé v. Queen Bee of Beverly Hills, LLC , 616 F.3d 158, 163 (2d Cir. 2010) ); accord Southern Ne......
  • Boyce v. Cycle Spectrum, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • December 8, 2015
    ...In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, 714 F.3d 659, 673 (2d Cir.2013), cert. denied sub nom., O'Neill v. Al Rajhi Bank, ––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 2870, 189 L.Ed.2d 848 (2014).a) Minimum Contacts “The concept of minimum contacts ... perform[s] two related, but distinguishable, functions.......
  • Fahey v. Breakthrough Films & Television Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • September 29, 2022
    ...allegation.” In re Terrorist Attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, 714 F.3d 659, 673 (2d Cir. 2013), cert, denied sub nom. O'Neill, Jr. v. Al Rajhi Bank, 573 U.S. 954 (2014). Motions Under 12(b)(6) To survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must plead “enough facts to state a clai......