Also known as: ius actionis · right of action
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A statutory or common-law entitlement authorizing a party to commence a lawsuit seeking redress for a specified injury. The measure of damages recoverable under the right depends on the wording of the statute creating it and the courts' interpretation of that wording.
Jacob Jennings died after a train crash caused by a defective braking system supplied by Titan Systems. His estate and employer filed suit under the state's wrongful death statute seeking lost future profits from a product launch that relied on his expertise. The court looked to the statute's text and prior interpretations to decide which categories of economic loss were compensable and whether the claimed profits qualified.
Judy Jacobs sued several telecommunications firms alleging an agreement to suppress competition. The complaint described parallel conduct but contained no direct evidence of an explicit agreement. The court examined whether the allegations stated a plausible right of action under the antitrust statute or merely described lawful independent behavior.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
James Johnson was subjected to an unlawful search and arrest by federal agents. He filed suit in federal court seeking damages for the constitutional violation even though no statute expressly authorized such relief. The court considered whether the Constitution itself supplied a right of action against the officers.
Joanna Jung, administratrix of an estate, sued in a Pennsylvania federal court over a fatal accident that occurred in Massachusetts. The defendants moved to transfer the case to Massachusetts. The court assessed whether the right of action created by the wrongful death statute would be affected by the change of venue.
Justin Jarvis's union sued his employer for breach of a collective bargaining agreement. The contract contained no express private remedy. The court determined whether federal common law supplied a right of action to enforce the agreement in federal court.
Javier Jimenez, a shareholder, sued corporate directors for misleading proxy statements that allegedly caused a merger to proceed on unfair terms. The securities statute did not expressly authorize private suits. The court considered whether an implied right of action existed to enforce the statutory duties.
The measure of damages follows the wording of the statute that creates the right of action and the courts' interpretation of that wording. Some statutes limit recovery to pecuniary losses suffered by designated beneficiaries while others permit recovery for nonpecuniary losses such as loss of society. The court must examine the specific statutory language and controlling precedent rather than applying a uniform common-law formula.
Supporting sources
Yes. In negligence cases a court may adopt a legislative enactment or administrative regulation as the standard of conduct even if the enactment does not expressly authorize private suits. The silence of the guideline on civil remedies does not prevent the court from using it to define reasonable care when the provision is designed to protect the class of persons that includes the plaintiff.
Supporting sources
A private plaintiff may recover damages only if the harm suffered is different in kind, not merely greater in degree, from the inconvenience experienced by the general public. Economic loss and reputational injury arising from a business use of the affected public space can qualify as special harm that supports an individual damages action.
Supporting sources
…R. Keeton, & D. Owen, Prosser and Keeton on Law of Torts § 108 (5th ed. 1984), and argue that because the analogous express right of action includes a reliance requirement, see, e. g., § 18(a) of the 1934 Act, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 78r(a), so too must an action implied under § 10(b). We agree that reliance is an element of…