Deneufbourg v. Didion

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there is no Bivens action against employees of a private company that operates a federal prison
• holding that \employment status – makes a critical difference\ and declining to extend Bivens claims against non-governmental prison employees
• holding that there is no Bivens remedy against employees of private prisons and discussing the fact that the court hesitates to recognize a new Bivens remedy when alternative, effective state tort remedies exist
• holding that the availability of state tort actions is adequate to preclude a Bivens remedy against employees of a privately operated federal prison because prisoners can still bring money-damages suits against those employees
• recognizing that defendant’s status 18 as private employee is a new context
• holding that a federal prisoner cannot assert a Bivens claim against a private individual employed by private entity operating federal prison because state law provides the prisoner with an alternative, adequate remedy against the private individual employee

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).