Djeredjian v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the presumption against an appellate court’s consideration of an argument in the first instance “is prudential, not jurisdictional,” and can yield to “the interests of judicial economy”
• explaining that the FTCA’s “private analogue inquiry asks whether ‘private individuals may create a relationship with third parties that is similar to the relationship between’ a governmental actor and citizen” (brackets and ellipses omitted
• stating certain defendants “were not named in the Amended Complaint and also are not parties to this appeal”
• dismissing false imprisonment claim because plaintiff, who was confined to a halfway house, “was already in custody and thus could not be arrested by the BOP, his custodian”
• dismissing false imprisonment claim because plaintiff, who was confined to a halfway house, “was already in custody and thus could not be arrested by the BOP, his custodian”
• cleaned up and quoting Chen v. United States, 854 F.2d 622, 626 (2d Cir. 1988)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).