In the Interest of L.W.F. v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the Supreme Court “has stopped short of overruling the Bivens trilogy”
• distilling “meaningful differences” as “factual distinctions and legal issues that might alter the cost–benefit balance that justified an implied damages remedy in those cases”
• emphasizing that the “Bivens trilogy” is a closed group
• describing Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
• “The [Supreme] Court held [in Ziglar] that the case represented an extension of Bivens to a new context” because “alternative remedies might have been available.”
• “Hotel or home, warrant or no warrant— the claims here and in Bivens stem from run-of-the-mill allegations of excessive force during an arrest.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).