Federal Cause of Action Definition and Key Legal Concepts

Key Takeaways

• A cause of action is a legal basis for filing a lawsuit, comprised of specific facts that entitle a person to legal relief.
• In federal court, a cause of action must derive from a constitutional provision, statute, regulation, or precedent.
• Multiple causes of action can be combined in a single lawsuit.
• Causes of action differ from remedies and jurisdiction, though they are related concepts.
• The existence of a valid cause of action is required for litigation to proceed in federal court.
• Understanding different types of causes of action and their elements is essential for building a strong legal claim.

Federal causes of action relate to a party's right to take legal action due to a violation of its legal rights. This is different from the general term cause of action. In federal litigation, a party only has cause of action if it has a recognized statutory or constitutional right to sue for a violation.

What Is a Cause of Action?

Plaintiffs are required to have a cause of action before being allowed to sue in federal court. The arena of federal litigation has a special meaning for this term.

Most attorneys use the terms legal claim and cause of action in the same way to indicate a plaintiff's legal rights violated by a defendant. In American law, cause of action is frequently used, and plaintiffs plead this all the time.

Plaintiffs may have a cause of action even when they're not entitled to any relief. For instance, a plaintiff may sue for declaratory or injunctive relief, even though the case doesn't meet preconditions for these types of remedies.

A cause of action is a set of factual elements that call for a legal remedy. The elements a plaintiff needs for a specific cause of action may come from the following:

• Statute
• Constitution
• Administrative regulation
• Judicial precedent

A lawsuit may contain several causes of action listed separately, such as the following:

• Breach of contract
• Fraud
• Negligence
• Debt
• Intentional destruction of property

By the end of the 20th century, federal courts began reacting to the administrative state and statutory innovations. As a result, they began to differentiate between rights, remedies, causes of action, and jurisdiction. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court is just as guilty as other courts in not always using cause of action correctly. This causes unnecessary confusion for a variety of legal issues.

When Does a Cause of Action Arise?

A cause of action arises at the moment when all necessary elements are present and a legal right has been violated. This timing is significant because it typically starts the statute of limitations clock—a deadline by which the plaintiff must file the lawsuit. For example:

• In a breach of contract, the cause of action arises when the breach occurs.
• In personal injury, it arises when the injury happens or is discovered.

Determining when a cause of action accrues is essential in avoiding untimely claims that could be dismissed.

Difference Between a Cause of Action and a Legal Claim

While often used interchangeably, there is a subtle difference between a "cause of action" and a "legal claim":

• A cause of action refers to the legal theory or basis that entitles a person to sue.
• A legal claim is the specific assertion made by a plaintiff in a complaint, often grounded in a cause of action.

In practice, courts and attorneys frequently treat these terms synonymously, but understanding the distinction can clarify legal arguments and pleadings.

Examples of Common Causes of Action

Understanding the types of causes of action can help clarify the concept. Some of the most commonly encountered causes of action include:

• Negligence: Failure to exercise reasonable care resulting in injury (e.g., car accidents).
• Breach of Contract: One party fails to perform under the terms of a binding agreement.
• Fraud: Intentional misrepresentation or concealment of material facts.
• Defamation: A false statement that harms another’s reputation.
• Conversion: Unauthorized taking or use of someone else’s property.
• Assault and Battery: Intentional act causing fear of harm (assault) or actual physical contact (battery).

Each of these has distinct elements that must be proven in court. For example, proving negligence requires demonstrating duty, breach, causation, and damages.

Essential Elements of a Cause of Action

A cause of action includes a specific set of factual and legal elements that must be proven for a lawsuit to succeed. These elements serve as a checklist for courts to determine whether a legal claim is valid. While the exact elements vary depending on the type of legal claim, most causes of action require the following:

• Legal Duty: A duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff under the law.
• Breach of Duty: An act or omission by the defendant that violates that duty.
• Causation: A direct link between the defendant’s breach and the harm caused.
• Damages: Actual harm suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the breach.

Failing to sufficiently plead even one element may result in the dismissal of a lawsuit. Courts scrutinize these elements, especially in motions to dismiss or for summary judgment.

How Did Cause of Action Start in Federal Courts?

For a long time, judges and scholars have debated federal common causes of action, which weren't created by state law or Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected federal general common law in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. Since then, the court has cautiously embraced some specific aspects of common law.

In federal court, there's a question regarding federal judicial power and if it can recognize common law causes of action. For example, a federal court may recognize implied causes of action for a federal statute violation, but that doesn't create a cause of action itself.

Despite the longstanding debate between courts and scholars, they have failed to reach a consensus or find a solution on how to resolve it. Judges and scholars have come to different conclusions using different contexts about the level of power federal courts have in recognizing federal common law.

From the time the U.S. was founded up through the 19th century, the Supreme Court didn't recognize common law in the federal area. It's a false premise that federal courts used the common law as an abstract to supply a cause of action in a civil suit. Congress passed certain statutes making civil causes of action available in federal courts, along with other related matters.

Today, the full importance of these statutes is often overlooked. However, they provide key context to help people understand the level of judicial power that federal courts hold, even within a limited subject matter jurisdiction.

Individuals in the First Congress debated many facets of federal power over civil disputes, such as the following:

• How much federal courts could exercise equity jurisdiction
• If litigants could enjoy the right to a jury trial
• Procedures for federal courts ordering execution on judgments
• How inconvenient or expensive federal litigation would be

In addition, Congress considered the source of causes of action.

The types of proceedings that federal courts typically use in civil cases had a large role in determining how to resolve these questions and considerations. Congress addressed these considerations by passing a series of early laws that detailed the types of proceedings that federal courts could apply.

The law isn't necessarily the same; it depends on where you live or the jurisdiction in which you bring suit. It's always best to consult with a legal professional if you feel you have a case, particularly a federal one.

How to Establish a Valid Cause of Action

To establish a valid cause of action, a plaintiff must:

1. Identify the legal theory under which they are suing.
2. Set forth factual allegations that, if true, satisfy all legal elements of the theory.
3. Demonstrate standing—a personal, direct interest in the case.
4. Ensure the case falls within the court's jurisdiction.
5. File the claim within the applicable statute of limitations.

Failure at any stage can result in dismissal. Legal advice is highly recommended when evaluating the strength and timing of a potential cause of action.

Statutory vs. Common Law Causes of Action

A cause of action exists only in civil law, where individuals or entities seek legal remedies for violations of rights or duties. In contrast, criminal law involves prosecution by the government for acts deemed offenses against the state or public.

• Civil law example: A plaintiff sues for breach of contract.
• Criminal law example: The state prosecutes for theft.

Although both systems involve courts, only civil plaintiffs file causes of action. Criminal charges are not considered causes of action, though they may arise from the same facts as a civil claim.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the definition of a cause of action?
   A cause of action is the legal basis upon which a plaintiff brings a lawsuit, including the facts and legal theory that justify judicial relief.
2. Can a lawsuit include multiple causes of action?
   Yes, a single lawsuit can assert multiple causes of action if they arise from the same or related events.
3. What is the difference between a cause of action and a claim?
   A cause of action is the legal right or theory; a claim is the actual assertion made by the plaintiff, usually grounded in a cause of action.
4. Do federal courts recognize implied causes of action?
   Sometimes. Federal courts may infer a cause of action from a statute, but they do so cautiously and typically only when there is strong evidence of congressional intent.
5. How do I know if I have a valid cause of action?
   You must meet all legal elements required for your specific type of claim. Consulting a qualified attorney is the best way to determine this.

If you need help with a legal matter, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.