Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Virginia opinions name it 4 courts 1988–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Imbler v. Pachtmangreen1 sentence2020Id. at 570 (citing Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 430-31 (1976)). | 1 | 1 |
John H. DRAPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PIPE AND FOUNDRY COMPANY, Defendant-Appelleegreen1 sentence2005When a federal statute provides its own limitations period, however, “state law is irrelevant in determining whether a private individual has lost his right of action under Title VII through the passage of time.” Id., citing Draper v. United States Pipe & Foundry Co., 527 F.2d 515, 522 (6th Cir. 1975). | 1 | 1 |
Thomas L. Bowers, Administrator of the Estate of Marguerite Anne Bowers, Deceased v. Robert A. Devito, M.D.green1 sentence1989Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616, 618-19 (7th Cir. 1982). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Shirley Presley v. City of Charlottesville Rivanna Trails Foundation
green
1 sentence2016The other case cited by respondents, Presley v. City of Charlottesville, 464 F.3d 480 (4th Cir. 2006), is a suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against a governmental entity for violation of Constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
cluster 451541
green
2 sentences2005When a federal statute provides its own limitations period, however, “state law is irrelevant in determining whether a private individual has lost his right of action under Title VII through the passage of time.” Id., citing Draper v. United States Pipe & Foundry Co., 527 F.2d 515, 522 (6th Cir. 1975). 2005In Scoggins v. Douglas, for example, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that Virginia’s tolling statute applied to the plaintiff’s suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution because neither contains a limitations period. 760 F.2d 535 , 538 (4th Cir. 1985). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman
red
1 sentence1988Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.