Jonathan L. Ashley, III, et al. v. Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft, et al.

New York, New York personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiffs who sued on wrongful death theories.



Plaintiffs are Americans who were killed or injured, as well as their family members, in terrorist attacks in Afghanistan. They sued three sets of banks—Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; Standard Chartered Bank, Standard Chartered PLC, and Standard Chartered Bank (Pakistan) Limited (together, "SCB”); and Danske Bank A/S—under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2333, as amended by the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act ("JASTA”), id. § 2333(d)(2), for aiding and abetting the 1 For a complete list of the parties to this appeal, contact the Clerk of Court.2 terrorist organizations who committed the attacks. Plaintiffs allege that the banks' customers used their banking services to execute tax fraud and money laundering schemes; the proceeds went to terrorist organizations, providing them with access to crucial financial resources, including those necessary to commit the attacks that injured Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also claim that SCB aided and abetted the terrorist attacks by providing banking services to two fertilizer companies whose product was smuggled into Afghanistan and used to make the bombs that killed or injured Plaintiffs.

District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint in its entirety. While Plaintiffs’ appeal was pending, the Supreme Court decided Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, 598 U.S. 471 (2023), which clarified the appropriate pleading standard for an aiding-and-abetting claim under JASTA.Applying Twitter and our prior JASTA precedent, we agree that Plaintiffs have not plausibly alleged that Defendants are liable under JASTA for aiding and abetting.



Affirmed