Teske v. Bnp Paribas, S.A.
This text of Teske v. Bnp Paribas, S.A. (Teske v. Bnp Paribas, S.A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TIMOTHY TESKE, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. Civil Action No. 16-701 (JDB)
BNP PARIBAS S.A., et al., Defendants.
ORDER
In January 2017, this Court dismissed a related case, Owens v. BNP Paribas S.A., 235 F.
Supp. 3d 85 (D.D.C. 2017), because plaintiffs had not adequately alleged causation for primary
liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act (“ATA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2333, and aiding-and-abetting
liability was not available under that statute. The Owens plaintiffs appealed the decision to the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and the Court stayed proceedings in Teske
pending the outcome of that appeal.
In July 2018, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Owens decision. Owens v. BNP Paribas,
S.A., 897 F.3d 266 (D.C. Cir. 2018). This Court lifted the stay in Teske and sought supplemental
briefs from the parties addressing the effect of the Owens decision on this case. Plaintiffs Timothy
and Sharon Teske responded, noting that “this case is identical in all respects to the Owens case”
and therefore requesting that this case be dismissed without prejudice. Pl.’s Resp. to Court’s Order
of 10/03/2018 Regarding Effect of Owens Decision [ECF No. 23] at 2.
Upon consideration of plaintiffs’ response, and the entire record herein, it is hereby
ORDERED that this case be DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED. /s/ JOHN D. BATES United States District Judge Dated: October 18, 2018
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Teske v. Bnp Paribas, S.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teske-v-bnp-paribas-sa-dcd-2018.