Tavarez v. Reno

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 district court properly considered an action brought under § 1983 as an action under Bivens
• stating that § 1983 action against federal defendants properly construed as Bivens action
• holding that Heck applies to Bivens claims
• referring to the implied cause of action against the United States for constitutional violations established in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
• dismissing appeal of dismissal of § 1983 claims for false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution where the plaintiff “has not demonstrated that his conviction has been invalidated in any manner”
• “A claim for damages based on a conviction or sentence that has not been invalidated [. . .] is not cognizable under § 1983.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).