Talk:Cause of action

Should mention consolidation into "one cause of action" in some jurisdictions and multiplicity of causes of action prior to this. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:46, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

BUTT HEAD

Merger

I oppose a merger because it could be different - for example, in bankruptcy law. Bearian (talk) 21:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed merges

If Claim (legal) and Implied cause of action were merged here, then we might have the start of a real article. bd2412 T 06:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• Merge accomplished. bd2412 T 20:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)111

actionable - incomplete definition

The word 'actionable' has uses outside the legal field. Random House Webster's unabridged dictionary, 2d editiongives as definition number three:"ready to go or be put into action; ready for use:..." In the textbook Introduction to Information Systems (2d ed)by Rainer, R. K. & Turban, E. the word is used in defining Knowledge. I did not find the definition for the word in the computer information systems field, though I have found many words have unique definitions in this field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wayne Lee Hood (talk • contribs) 19:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Right to a Remedy - federal vs. state

My understanding is that most states have a general "right to a remedy" clauses in their state constitutions. Hence many times people can sue in state court without a specific "cause of action." In federal court, the situation is reversed. One needs either (a) a specific statute (example - one cannot discriminate in jobs based upon race), (b) a statute providing a cause of action for a class of rights - ie. Section 1983 which is very common or (c) a Court ruling that an implied right exists. There are a number of legal reviews on this issue. (Just my thoughts).