146 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 253,227 times 279 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 267,097 times 365 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "
Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd
563 U.S. 731 (2011) Cited 8,979 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to be clearly established, "existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate"
Hope v. Pelzer
536 U.S. 730 (2002) Cited 7,406 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he obvious cruelty inherent" in putting inmates in certain wantonly "degrading and dangerous" situations provides officers "with some notice that their alleged conduct violate" the Eighth Amendment
Anderson v. Creighton
483 U.S. 635 (1987) Cited 15,430 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed"
Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Meyer
510 U.S. 471 (1994) Cited 7,020 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding a Bivens claim does not lie against federal agencies because, if damages claims were permitted against federal agencies, "there would be no reason for aggrieved parties to bring damages actions against individual officers" and thus "the deterrent effects of the Bivens remedy would be lost"
Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents
403 U.S. 388 (1971) Cited 25,882 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding that there is an implied cause of action for money damages against federal officials for violations of the Fourth Amendment
Crawford-El v. Britton
523 U.S. 574 (1998) Cited 3,878 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiff may pursue ordinary discovery into official's intent for claims having intent element notwithstanding irrelevance of intent to qualified immunity defense
Robbins v. Oklahoma
519 F.3d 1242 (10th Cir. 2008) Cited 5,719 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that collective allegations do not satisfy a plaintiff's "burden . . . to provide fair notice of the grounds for the claims made against each of the defendants"
Santiago v. Warminster Township
629 F.3d 121 (3d Cir. 2010) Cited 4,225 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Court should disregard "'naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement' and 'threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements.'" (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678)
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 156,480 times 194 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1346 - United States as defendant
28 U.S.C. § 1346 Cited 24,056 times 23 Legal Analyses
Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"
Section 2680 - Exceptions
28 U.S.C. § 2680 Cited 7,686 times 12 Legal Analyses
Concluding that claims for injurious falsehoods, disparagement of property, slander of goods, or trade libel are claims arising out of libel or slander under the FTCA
Section 702 - Right of review
5 U.S.C. § 702 Cited 7,057 times 24 Legal Analyses
Granting judicial review of "agency action"
Section 2679 - Exclusiveness of remedy
28 U.S.C. § 2679 Cited 5,337 times 5 Legal Analyses
Granting tort immunity to federal agency employees
Section 552a - Records maintained on individuals
5 U.S.C. § 552a Cited 4,438 times 47 Legal Analyses
Finding that it is a Department of Justice component that has as its principal function the enforcement of criminal laws includ[ing] correctional authorities
Section 3771 - Crime victims' rights
18 U.S.C. § 3771 Cited 1,965 times 15 Legal Analyses
Granting crime victim, crime victim's lawful representative and "the attorney for the Government" the right to assert the crime victim's CVRA rights
Section 2701 - Unlawful access to stored communications
18 U.S.C. § 2701 Cited 1,326 times 135 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"
Section 2703 - Required disclosure of customer communications or records
18 U.S.C. § 2703 Cited 1,205 times 100 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that these providers "shall disclose" such information "when the governmental entity uses an administrative subpoena authorized by a Federal or State statute"
Section 2707 - Civil action
18 U.S.C. § 2707 Cited 458 times 19 Legal Analyses
Granting relief to those "aggrieved by any violation of this chapter in which the conduct constituting the violation is engaged in with a knowing or intentional state of mind"

Kelley et al v. Federal Bureau of Investigation et al

146 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

Holding that, to be clearly established, "existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate"

Holding that "[t]he obvious cruelty inherent" in putting inmates in certain wantonly "degrading and dangerous" situations provides officers "with some notice that their alleged conduct violate" the Eighth Amendment

Holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed"

Holding a Bivens claim does not lie against federal agencies because, if damages claims were permitted against federal agencies, "there would be no reason for aggrieved parties to bring damages actions against individual officers" and thus "the deterrent effects of the Bivens remedy would be lost"

Holding that there is an implied cause of action for money damages against federal officials for violations of the Fourth Amendment

Holding that plaintiff may pursue ordinary discovery into official's intent for claims having intent element notwithstanding irrelevance of intent to qualified immunity defense

Holding that collective allegations do not satisfy a plaintiff's "burden . . . to provide fair notice of the grounds for the claims made against each of the defendants"

Holding that the Court should disregard "'naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement' and 'threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements.'" (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678)

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"

Concluding that claims for injurious falsehoods, disparagement of property, slander of goods, or trade libel are claims arising out of libel or slander under the FTCA

Granting judicial review of "agency action"

Granting tort immunity to federal agency employees

Finding that it is a Department of Justice component that has as its principal function the enforcement of criminal laws includ[ing] correctional authorities

Granting crime victim, crime victim's lawful representative and "the attorney for the Government" the right to assert the crime victim's CVRA rights

Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"

Recognizing that these providers "shall disclose" such information "when the governmental entity uses an administrative subpoena authorized by a Federal or State statute"

Granting relief to those "aggrieved by any violation of this chapter in which the conduct constituting the violation is engaged in with a knowing or intentional state of mind"