Cort V. Ash Four-Factor Test

12 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Simion Stepanischen v. Merchs. Despatch Transp. Corp.
  722 F.2d 922· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-06 ·cited 69×
  The court held that a private right of action exists under Section 2 Fourth of the Railway Labor Act and that genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment for the employer.
• United States v. City OF Philadelphia
  644 F.2d 187· 3d Cir.· 1980-12-29 ·cited 38×
  The dissenting judge argues that the case warrants en banc review because the panel decision conflicts with prior circuit precedent and Supreme Court authority regarding the Attorney General's authority to bring suit and the pleading standards applicable to the government. The di
• Stern v. Merrill Lynch
  603 F.2d 1073· 4th Cir.· 1979-07-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that investors have an implied private right of action against brokers for violations of margin requirements under § 7 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation T, provided the investors are not knowing participants in the violation.
• McDANIEL v. The Univ. OF Chicago & Argonne
  548 F.2d 689· 7th Cir.· 1977-01-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Davis-Bacon Act contains an implied private right of action for laborers and mechanics to recover unpaid prevailing wages, necessary to effectuate congressional intent.
• Polansky v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
  523 F.2d 332· 3d Cir.· 1975-09-09 ·cited 20×
  A private cause of action cannot be implied from 49 U.S.C. § 1374(b) or § 1381 for alleged breaches of contract and misrepresentation regarding tour ground accommodations.
• Davis v. United AIR Lines, Inc.
  662 F.2d 120· 2d Cir.· 1981-09-17 ·cited 15×
  The dissenting judge would hold that handicapped individuals have a private right of action under § 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
• Rauch v. United Instruments, Inc.
  548 F.2d 452· 3d Cir.· 1976-12-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Federal Aviation Act does not imply a private cause of action for aircraft owners seeking to recover economic losses incurred due to compliance with air safety regulations.
• Bratton v. Shiffrin
  585 F.2d 223· 7th Cir.· 1978-09-18 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the trial court's decision finding no private cause of action exists under the regulations in question.
• Monsi L'Ggrke v. Benkula
  966 F.2d 1346· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-09 ·cited 3×
  A student-borrower cannot bring a private cause of action against an educational institution for alleged violations of Title IV of the Higher Education Act.
• Arleamon Sadler, Jr. v. Citibank, N.A.
  947 F.2d 642· 2d Cir.· 1991-10-22
  The court held that the Bank Protection Act of 1968 does not create an implied private right of action for individuals harmed by a bank's alleged violation of security regulations.