Cause of Action Court Decisions Litigating 
Constitutional Law Reporter
JUNE 17, 2022
Supreme Court held that the authority of a court to imply a cause of action under Bivens v. While the Court did not overrule Bivens , it did emphasize that recognizing a Bivens cause of action is “a disfavored judicial activity.”. In Egbert v. Boule , 596 U.S. _ (2022), the U.S. Border Patrol agent.
Conflict of Laws
MAY 31, 2021
However, the defendant/appellant challenged the jurisdiction of the Kastina State High Court to hear the case on the basis that the contract in issue was concluded in Yobe State, where it claimed the cause of action arose, which it argued was outside the jurisdiction of Kastina State.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 20, 2023
The question before the Supreme Court is when the clock on that two-year statute of limitations began to run. Normally, Kavanaugh explained, that occurs when a plaintiff has a “complete and present cause of action” – that is, when the plaintiff can actually file a lawsuit and obtain relief.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
DECEMBER 21, 2021
On December 07, 2021, the Federal Regional Court of the Fourth Region (TRF4) – one of Brazil’s federal courts of appeal – decided what should be the competent jurisdiction to hear the case of IEA v. The decision may have gone unnoticed. IEA appealed the transfer decision to the federal appellate court (TRF4).
FDA Law Blog
JULY 8, 2024
That the claim rested on a federal statute and required the SEC to establish facts that do not match any cause of action known to the common law in 1791 was not dispositive. According to the Court, the remedy is considered the more important factor. The impact on FDA matters could be significant.
Constitutional Law Reporter
JUNE 1, 2023
According to the Court majority, when a prisoner pursues state post-conviction DNA testing through the state-provided litigation process, the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural due process claim begins to run at the end of the state-court litigation.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
MARCH 21, 2022
However, despite allowing the Minister’s appeal, the Court rejected the Minister’s argument that the primary judge made findings based on evidence of climate change that were unfounded. The decision has significant implications for future climate litigation claims in Australia. 2021 Federal Court Decision .
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content