Kolfenbach v. Mansour

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that plaintiff had no vested right in claim not pending on date of enactment and, therefore, statute had no retroactive effect
• concluding that plaintiff had no vested right in claim not pending on date of enactment and, therefore, statute had no retroactive effect
• examining this identical question and concluding that party's rights vest when a plaintiff files suit
• examining this identical question and concluding that party’s rights vest when a plaintiff files suit
• listing cases and stating that\[o]ther courts examining this issue have uniformly concluded that there is no language in the statute either permitting or forbidding retroactive application of Section 1964(c) [RICO].\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).