Benny L. Forest, Sr. v. United States Postal Service

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• following the Wilson decision’s analysis and observing that “applying the statute of limitations does not affect the substantive rights of the parties in this case”
• new statute of limitations has prospective application because it applies to the filing of a complaint, which occurred after the statute was enacted
• new statute of limitations has prospective application because it applies to the filing of a complaint, which occurred after the statute was enacted
• new statute of limitations has prospective application because it applies to the filing of a complaint, which occurred after the statute was enacted
• amended statute of limitations does not implicate retroactivity because “[a] statute of limitations does not relate to the conduct of a defendant, but instead relates to the plaintiff’s conduct in filing the claim”
• amended statute of limitations does not implicate retroactivity because “[a] statute of limitations does not relate to the conduct of a defendant, but instead relates to the plaintiff’s conduct in filing the claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).