42 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 236,853 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 216,858 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
  3. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

    475 U.S. 574 (1986)   Cited 113,397 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
  4. McNeil v. United States

    508 U.S. 106 (1993)   Cited 6,744 times
    Holding that an action must be dismissed when statutory exhaustion requirement was not met until after action was filed
  5. United States v. Kwai Fun Wong

    575 U.S. 402 (2015)   Cited 701 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the time limits of 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) may be equitably tolled
  6. United States v. Kubrick

    444 U.S. 111 (1979)   Cited 2,593 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that claim under Federal Tort Claims Act accrued when plaintiff possessed "critical facts that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury," and rejecting argument that "plaintiff's ignorance of his legal rights" deferred accrual
  7. Rotella v. Wood

    528 U.S. 549 (2000)   Cited 919 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding discovery rule inapplicable to § 2462 limitations period
  8. United States v. Testan

    424 U.S. 392 (1976)   Cited 2,203 times
    Holding that Back Pay Act does not provide a remedy for misclassified federal employees
  9. United States v. Sherwood

    312 U.S. 584 (1941)   Cited 3,410 times
    Holding that the Claims Court lacked jurisdiction over claims that are not against United States
  10. Laningham v. U.S. Navy

    813 F.2d 1236 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 1,157 times
    Finding that Navy did not act intentionally or willfully under § 552a(g) because it was "warranted [in its] belief that its actions were lawful [under the Privacy Act]"
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 329,663 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Section 1346 - United States as defendant

    28 U.S.C. § 1346   Cited 24,114 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"
  13. Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 1   Cited 15,116 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"
  14. Section 2671 - Definitions

    28 U.S.C. § 2671   Cited 9,402 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Defining "[e]mployee of the government" for purposes of the FTCA as "officers or employees of any federal agency "
  15. Section 2675 - Disposition by federal agency as prerequisite; evidence

    28 U.S.C. § 2675   Cited 7,108 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth FTCA's administrative exhaustion requirement
  16. Section 2401 - Time for commencing action against United States

    28 U.S.C. § 2401   Cited 6,216 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a tort claim against the United States must be presented to the appropriate federal agency within two years after the claim accrues
  17. Section 511 - Decisions of the Secretary; finality

    38 U.S.C. § 511   Cited 607 times
    Providing that decisions related to the provision of a veteran's benefits "may not be reviewed by any court, whether by an action in the nature of mandamus or otherwise."