12 U.S.C. § 3416
Jurisdiction
An action to enforce any provision of this chapter may be brought in any appropriate United States district court without regard to the amount in controversy within three years from the date on which the violation occurs or the date of discovery of such violation, whichever is later.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Rotkiske v. Klemm, 140 S. Ct. 355 (2019).
Rotkiske v. Klemm, 140 S. Ct. 355 (2019). “, 12 U.S.C. § 3416 ; 15 U.S.C. § 1679i. In fact, at the time Congress enacted the FDCPA, many statutes included provisions that, in certain circumstances, would begin the running of a limitations period upon the discovery of a violation, injury, or some other event.”
Edelmann v. United States, 76 Fed. Cl. 376 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “The Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Plaintiffs’ RFPA Claims The RFPA specifically assigns jurisdiction over RFPA claims to the district courts.”
Strother v. Harte, 171 F. Supp. 2d 203 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). “12 U.S.C. § 3416 . The alleged disclosures were made in 1993 or 1994.”
McDonough v. Widnall, 891 F. Supp. 1439 (D. Colo. 1995). “Jurisdiction is proper under 12 U.S.C. § 3416 . Hearings on the motion were held on March 16 and May 10, 1995.”
Walker v. White, 89 S.W.3d 573 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “12 U.S.C.S. § 3416 (2002). The Bank argues that this jurisdictional statement, in combination with § 3410 of the federal Act, which mandates that a motion to quash a subpoena issued by a federal agency must be brought in an appropriate United States District Court, evidences…”
Pittsburgh Nat'l Bank v. United States, 771 F.2d 73 (3rd Cir. 1985). “Subject matter jurisdiction is based on 12 U.S.C. § 3416 (1982). This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.”
Mead v. City First Bank of DC, NA, 616 F. Supp. 2d 78 (D.D.C. 2009). “” 12 U.S.C. § 3416 . In Doe v. Board on Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 717 F.”
Hunt v. United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 520 F. Supp. 580 (N.D. Tex. 1981). “Jurisdiction is predicated upon 12 U.S.C. § 3416 , 1 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 .”
Giannone v. Bank of Am., N.A., 812 F. Supp. 2d 216 (E.D.N.Y 2011). “Plaintiff was aware of the communication where information was allegedly inappropriately exchanged by March 2007 at the latest.”
Flowers v. First Hawaiian Bank, 289 F. Supp. 2d 1213 (D. Haw. 2003). “Apparently, Major Ohlweiler was only added as a party in the Second Amended Complaint on March 28, 2003. One question would be whether claims against him, if they exist, would relate back to when the complaint was filed originally in 1999.”
Frank McCune, Jr. v. United States Dept of Just., 592 F. App'x 287 (5th Cir. 2014). “” 12 U.S.C. § 3416 . “Limitations periods in statutes waiving sovereign immunity are jurisdictional,” Ramming v.”
Raikos v. Bloomfield State Bank, 703 F. Supp. 1365 (S.D. Ind. 1989). “Actions to enforce any provision of the Act can only be brought in an appropriate United States district Court “within three years from the date on which the violation occurs or the date of discovery of such violation, whichever is later.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.