HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

A cause of action or right of action, in
law Law is a set of rules that are created and are enforceable by social or governmental institutions to regulate behavior,Robertson, ''Crimes against humanity'', 90. with its precise definition a matter of longstanding debate. It has been vario ...
, is a set of facts sufficient to justify suing to obtain money or property, or to justify the enforcement of a
legal right Some philosophers distinguish two types of rights, natural rights and legal rights. * Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are ''universal'', ''fundamental right ...
against another party. The term also refers to the legal theory upon which a plaintiff brings suit (such as
breach of contract Breach of contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the other party ...
,
battery Battery most often refers to: * Electric battery, a device that provides electrical power * Battery (crime), a crime involving unlawful physical contact Battery may also refer to: Energy source *Automotive battery, a device to provide power t ...
, or
false imprisonment False imprisonment or unlawful imprisonment occurs when a person intentionally restricts another person’s movement within any area without legal authority, justification, or the restrained person's permission. Actual physical restraint is ...
). The legal document which carries a claim is often called a 'statement of claim' in English law, or a ' complaint' in U.S. federal practice and in many U.S. states. It can be any communication notifying the party to whom it is addressed of an alleged fault which resulted in damages, often expressed in amount of money the receiving party should pay/reimburse. To pursue a cause of action, a
plaintiff A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the p ...
pleads or alleges facts in a complaint, the pleading that initiates a lawsuit. A cause of action generally encompasses both the
legal theory Jurisprudence, or legal theory, is the theoretical study of the propriety of law. Scholars of jurisprudence seek to explain the nature of law in its most general form and they also seek to achieve a deeper understanding of legal reasoning ...
(the legal wrong the plaintiff claims to have suffered) and the remedy (the relief a court is asked to grant). Often the facts or circumstances that entitle a person to seek judicial relief may create multiple causes of action. Although it is fairly straightforward to file a Statement of Claim in most jurisdictions, if it is not done properly, then the filing party may lose her case due to simple technicalities. The need to balance procedural expediency and continuity (the technicalities of which one might fall foul) expressed as “procedure rules” (be they civil or criminal) must be balanced with the highest priority of all -- to achieve justice. The court and its officers are obliged to serve justice first. There are a number of specific causes of action, including:
contract A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties that creates, defines, and governs mutual rights and obligations between them. A contract typically involves the transfer of goods, services, money, or a promise to tran ...
-based actions; statutory causes of action;
torts A tort is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishabl ...
such as assault,
battery Battery most often refers to: * Electric battery, a device that provides electrical power * Battery (crime), a crime involving unlawful physical contact Battery may also refer to: Energy source *Automotive battery, a device to provide power t ...
,
invasion of privacy The right to privacy is an element of various legal traditions that intends to restrain governmental and private actions that threaten the privacy of individuals. Over 150 national constitutions mention the right to privacy. On 10 December 194 ...
,
fraud In law, fraud is intentional deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain, or to deprive a victim of a legal right. Fraud can violate civil law (e.g., a fraud victim may sue the fraud perpetrator to avoid the fraud or recover monetary compens ...
,
slander Defamation is the act of communicating to a third party false statements about a person, place or thing that results in damage to its reputation. It can be spoken (slander) or written (libel). It constitutes a tort or a crime. The legal defini ...
,
negligence Negligence (Lat. ''negligentia'') is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as ''negligence'' involves harm caused by failing to act as a ...
,
intentional infliction of emotional distress Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED; sometimes called the tort of outrage) is a common law tort that allows individuals to recover for severe emotional distress caused by another individual who intentionally or recklessly inflicted ...
; and suits in
equity Equity may refer to: Finance, accounting and ownership * Equity (finance), ownership of assets that have liabilities attached to them ** Stock, equity based on original contributions of cash or other value to a business ** Home equity, the dif ...
such as
unjust enrichment In laws of equity, unjust enrichment occurs when one person is enriched at the expense of another in circumstances that the law sees as unjust. Where an individual is unjustly enriched, the law imposes an obligation upon the recipient to make res ...
and
quantum meruit ''Quantum meruit'' is a Latin phrase meaning "what one has earned". In the context of contract law, it means something along the lines of "reasonable value of services". In the United States, the elements of ''quantum meruit'' are determined by ...
. The points a plaintiff must prove to win a given type of case are called the "elements" of that cause of action. For example, for a claim of
negligence Negligence (Lat. ''negligentia'') is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as ''negligence'' involves harm caused by failing to act as a ...
, the elements are: the (existence of a)
duty A duty (from "due" meaning "that which is owing"; fro, deu, did, past participle of ''devoir''; la, debere, debitum, whence "debt") is a commitment or expectation to perform some action in general or if certain circumstances arise. A duty may ...
, breach (of that duty), proximate cause (by that breach), and
damages At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognised at ...
. If a complaint does not allege facts sufficient to support every element of a claim, the court, upon motion by the opposing party, may dismiss the complaint for
failure to state a claim A demurrer is a pleading in a lawsuit that objects to or challenges a pleading filed by an opposing party. The word ''demur'' means "to object"; a ''demurrer'' is the document that makes the objection. Lawyers informally define a demurrer as a de ...
for which relief can be granted. The defendant to a cause of action must file an "Answer" to the complaint in which the ''claims'' can be admitted or denied (including denial on the basis of insufficient information in the complaint to form a response). The answer may also contain counterclaims in which the "Counterclaim Plaintiff" states its own causes of action. Finally, the answer may contain affirmative defenses. Most defenses must be raised at the first possible opportunity either in the answer or by motion or are deemed waived. A few defenses, in particular a court's lack of subject matter
jurisdiction Jurisdiction (from Latin 'law' + 'declaration') is the legal term for the legal authority granted to a legal entity to enact justice. In federations like the United States, areas of jurisdiction apply to local, state, and federal levels. Jur ...
, need not be pleaded and may be raised at any time.


Implied cause of action

Implied cause of action is a term used in
United States The United States of America (U.S.A. or USA), commonly known as the United States (U.S. or US) or America, is a country primarily located in North America. It consists of 50 states, a federal district, five major unincorporated territorie ...
statutory and constitutional law for circumstances when a
court A court is any person or institution, often as a government institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance ...
will determine that a law that creates rights also allows private parties to bring a lawsuit, even though no such remedy is explicitly provided for in the law. Implied causes of action arising under the
Constitution of the United States The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America. It superseded the Articles of Confederation, the nation's first constitution, in 1789. Originally comprising seven articles, it delineates the natio ...
are treated differently from those based on
statutes A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs the legal entities of a city, state, or country by way of consent. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. Statutes are rules made by le ...
.


Constitutional causes of action

Perhaps the best known case creating an implied cause of action for
constitutional A constitution is the aggregate of fundamental principles or established precedents that constitute the legal basis of a polity, organisation or other type of entity and commonly determine how that entity is to be governed. When these princip ...
rights is '' Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents'', 403 U.S. 388 (1971). In that case, the
United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...
ruled that an individual whose Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by federal agents could sue for the violation of the Amendment itself, despite the lack of any federal statute authorizing such a suit. The existence of a remedy for the violation was implied from the importance of the right violated. In a later case, '' Schweiker v. Chilicky'', 487 U.S. 412 (1988), the Supreme Court determined that a cause of action would not be implied for the violation of rights where the
U.S. Congress The United States Congress is the legislature of the federal government of the United States. It is Bicameralism, bicameral, composed of a lower body, the United States House of Representatives, House of Representatives, and an upper body, ...
had already provided a remedy for the violation of rights at issue, even if the remedy was inadequate.


Statutory causes of action


Federal law

An implied private right of action is not a cause of action expressly created by a statute. Rather, a court interprets the statute to silently include such a cause of action. Since the 1950s, the United States Supreme Court "has taken three different approaches, each more restrictive than the prior, in deciding when to create private rights of action." In '' J.I. Case Co. v. Borak'' (1964), a case under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Court, examining the statute's legislative history and looking at what it believed were the purposes of the statute, held that a private right of action should be implied under § 14(a) of the Act. Under the circumstances, the Court said, it was "the duty of the courts to be alert to provide such remedies as are necessary to make effective the congressional purpose." In ''
Cort v. Ash ''Cort v. Ash'', 422 U.S. 66 (1975), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court determined whether a court may imply a cause of action from a criminal statute. Background Defendant/petitioner Stewart S. Cort, chairman of the board ...
'' (1975), the issue was whether a civil cause of action existed under a criminal statute prohibiting corporations from making contributions to a presidential campaign. The Court said that no such action should be implied, and laid down four factors to be considered in determining whether a statute implicitly included a private right of action: # Whether the plaintiff is part of the class of persons "for whose especial benefit" the statute was enacted, # Whether the legislative history suggests that Congress intended to create a cause of action, # Whether granting an implied cause of action would support the underlying remedial scheme set down in the statute, and # Whether the issue would be one that is traditionally left to state law. The Supreme Court used the four-part ''Cort v. Ash'' test for several years, and in applying the test, " r the most part, the Court refused to create causes of action." An important application of the test, however, came in ''
Cannon v. University of Chicago ''Cannon v. University of Chicago'', 441 U.S. 677 (1979), was a United States Supreme Court case which interpreted Congressional silence in the face of earlier interpretations of similar laws to determine that Title IX of the Higher Education Act ...
'' (1979), which recognized an implied private right of action. There, a plaintiff sued under
Title IX Title IX is the most commonly used name for the federal civil rights law in the United States that was enacted as part (Title IX) of the Education Amendments of 1972. It prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school or any other educat ...
of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibited sex discrimination in any federally funded program. The Court, stating that the female plaintiff was within the class protected by the statute, that Congress had intended to create a private right of action to enforce the law, that such a right of action was consistent with the remedial purpose Congress had in mind, and that discrimination was a matter of traditionally federal and not state concern. Justice Powell, however, dissented and criticized the Court's approach to implied rights of action, which he said was incompatible with the doctrine of
separation of powers Separation of powers refers to the division of a state's government into branches, each with separate, independent powers and responsibilities, so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with those of the other branches. The typic ...
. It was the job of Congress, not the federal courts, Justice Powell said, to create causes of action. Therefore, the only appropriate analysis was whether Congress intended to create a private right of action. "Absent the most compelling evidence of affirmative congressional intent, a federal court should not infer a private cause of action." Very shortly after ''Cannon'' was decided, the Court adopted what legal scholars have called a new approach to the issue in '' Touche Ross & Co. v. Redington'' (1979). At issue was an implied right under another section of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Court said that the first three factors mentioned in ''Cort v. Ash'' were simply meant to be "relied upon in determining legislative intent." "The ultimate question," the Court concluded, "is one of legislative intent, not one of whether this Court thinks that it can improve upon the statutory scheme that Congress enacted into law." Justice Scalia and Justice O'Connor have stated that they believe ''Touche Ross'' effectively overruled the older ''Cort v. Ash'' test. The controlling
strict constructionist In the United States, strict constructionism is a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts such interpretation only to the exact wording of the law (namely the Constitution). Strict sense of the term ...
test in effect today was set forth by Justice Scalia in '' Alexander v. Sandoval,'' 532 U.S. 275 (2001), in which the key issue is whether the text and structure of the statute alone reveal whether Congress intended to create a private right of action. Under ''Sandoval'', contextual evidence of legislative intent is relevant only insofar as it clarifies the meaning of the text.


State law

Even though ''Cort'' was effectively overruled, many states still use the first three ''Cort'' factors for their general test for determining whether an implied private cause of action exists under a state statute, including Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Washington. Historically, Texas courts had wandered around in a chaotic fashion between the ''Cort'' test and a liberal construction test roughly similar to the old ''Borak'' test, but in 2004, the
Texas Supreme Court The Supreme Court of Texas (SCOTX) is the court of last resort for civil matters (including juvenile delinquency cases, which are categorized as civil under the Texas Family Code) in the U.S. state of Texas. A different court, the Texas Court of ...
overruled both and adopted the textualist ''Sandoval'' test. Some states have developed their own tests independently of the ''Borak'', ''Cort'', and ''Sandoval'' line of federal cases. For example, prior to 1988, California courts used a vague liberal construction test, under which ''any'' statute "embodying a public policy" was privately enforceable by any injured member of the public for whose benefit the statute was enacted. This was most unsatisfactory to conservatives on the
Supreme Court of California The Supreme Court of California is the highest and final court of appeals in the courts of the U.S. state of California. It is headquartered in San Francisco at the Earl Warren Building, but it regularly holds sessions in Los Angeles and Sacra ...
, such as Associate Justice
Frank K. Richardson Frank Kellogg Richardson (February 13, 1914 – October 5, 1999) was an American attorney and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of California, California Supreme Court. Early life and education Born in St. Helena, California, Richardson grad ...
, who articulated a strict constructionist view in a 1979
dissenting opinion A dissenting opinion (or dissent) is an opinion in a legal case in certain legal systems written by one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority opinion of the court which gives rise to its judgment. Dissenting opinions are no ...
. As Richardson saw it, the Legislature's ''silence'' on the issue of whether a cause of action existed to enforce a statute should be interpreted as the Legislature's intent to ''not'' create such a cause of action. In November 1986, Chief Justice
Rose Bird Rose Elizabeth Bird (November 2, 1936 – December 4, 1999) was the 25th Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court. Her career was marked by firsts. She was the first female clerk of the Nevada Supreme Court, the first female deputy publ ...
and two fellow liberal colleagues were ejected from the court by the state's electorate for opposing
the death penalty Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is the state-sanctioned practice of deliberately killing a person as a punishment for an actual or supposed crime, usually following an authorized, rule-governed process to conclude that t ...
. Bird's replacement, Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas, authored an opinion in 1988 that adopted Richardson's strict constructionist view with regard to the interpretation of the California Insurance Code. A 2008 decision by the Court of Appeal''Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Mendes'', 160 Cal. App. 4th 136 (2008). and a 2010 decision by the Supreme Court itself''Lu v. Hawaiian Gardens Casino''
50 Cal. 4th 592, 601, fn. 6
(2010).
finally established that Justice Richardson's strict constructionism as adopted by the Lucas court would ''retroactively'' apply to all California statutes. In the 2010 decision in ''Lu v. Hawaiian Gardens Casino'', Justice Ming Chin wrote for a unanimous court that "we begin with the premise that a violation of a state statute does not necessarily give rise to a private cause of action."


Case law

*'' Werling v. Sandy'' (Ohio 1985)


See also

*
Form of action The forms of action were the different procedures by which a legal claim could be made during much of the history of the English common law. Depending on the court, a plaintiff would purchase a writ in Chancery (or file a bill) which would set in ...


References

{{Authority control Civil procedure * es:Acción jurisdiccional it:Azione (diritto)