22 U.S.C. § 1199

Repealed. Pub. L. 95–105, title I, § 111(a)(1), Aug. 17, 1977, 91 Stat. 848

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1976–2015 · leading case: United States for Use of Garcia v. McAninch, 435 F. Supp. 240 (E.D.N.Y 1977).
United States for Use of Garcia v. McAninch, 435 F. Supp. 240 (E.D.N.Y 1977). · cites it 5× “The plaintiffs in the above actions seek damages under 22 U.S.C. § 1199 for harm they allegedly suffered because of the defendants’ failure to issue visas to a fiance and a spouse.”
Frederick v. Hillyer, 82 F. Supp. 3d 435 (D.D.C. 2015). · cites it 3× “§ 3926 — does not create any private cause of action or remedy, and the Court cannot now infer in it the cause of action that Congress long ago repealed.”
Pena v. Kissinger, 409 F. Supp. 1182 (S.D.N.Y. 1976). “22 U.S. C.A. § 1199 (Supp.1976) provides that: Whenever any consular officer is guilty of any willful malfeasance or abuse of power, or of any corrupt conduct in his office, he shall be liable to all persons injured by any such malfeasance, abuse, or corrupt conduct, for all…”
United States v. King, 469 F. Supp. 167 (D.S.C. 1979). “§ 371 ; (2) a substantive count in violation of 22 U.S.C. § 1199 ; and (3) twenty-one substantive counts in violation of 18 U.”
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.