Federal Litigation and Defense Attorneys

Federal Litigation Lawyers

Ratliff Jackson LLP represents individuals and businesses as federal litigation lawyers in civil, regulatory, and administrative matters brought by or against the federal government. Federal practice operates under its own procedural rules, its own courts, and its own body of statutory and constitutional law. A matter that would be routine in state court often takes an entirely different path once a federal agency, a federal statute, or the United States itself becomes a party.

Our federal practice centers on the civil and regulatory side of the federal system: claims against the United States, challenges to agency decisions, forfeiture of property, constitutional civil rights actions, and benefits denials that reach federal court. Each of these areas has its own filing prerequisites, deadlines, and standards of review, and each one is unforgiving of procedural missteps. We handle these matters with attention to the specific federal framework that governs them.

How Federal Civil Matters Differ From State Cases

Federal civil litigation is not simply state litigation moved to a different courthouse. The differences begin at the threshold and affect the case at every stage.

• Jurisdiction is limited. Federal courts hear only the categories of cases the Constitution and Congress allow, primarily matters raising a federal question or involving the United States as a party. Establishing that a claim belongs in federal court is itself a threshold issue.
• Prerequisites often come before the lawsuit. Several federal claims require a party to complete an administrative process before any court will hear the dispute. A tort claim against the United States, for example, cannot be filed until an administrative claim has been presented to the responsible agency and denied.
• The standard of review may already be set. When a case reviews an agency decision, the court frequently does not decide the question fresh. It reviews the agency record under a deferential standard, which shapes the entire strategy from the first filing.
• The government is a repeat litigant. Federal agencies and United States Attorneys litigate these matters constantly and hold procedural advantages. Effective representation requires familiarity with how the federal system actually operates.

Federal Civil and Regulatory Matters We Handle

Our federal litigation practice covers the following areas. Each links to a dedicated page with the governing law and process explained in detail.

Federal Administrative Law

Federal agencies make decisions that carry the force of law through rulemaking and adjudication. When an agency acts outside its authority or without a rational basis, the Administrative Procedure Act provides a route to judicial review. Under 5 U.S.C. Section 706, a reviewing court can set aside agency action found to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, in excess of statutory authority, or reached without observing required procedure. Learn more about federal administrative law.

Federal Agency Appeals

Many disputes with a federal agency proceed through an internal appeal process before they reach a court. Judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act is generally available only after a final agency action, and the record built during the agency process often controls what a court may later consider. Handling the appeal correctly at the agency level protects the ability to seek review afterward. Learn more about federal agency appeals.

Federal Civil Rights

Federal law provides a civil remedy when a government official violates a person's constitutional or federal rights. Under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a person may sue state and local officials who act under color of state law. Constitutional claims against individual federal officers proceed instead through a separate and now narrowly limited doctrine recognized in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The distinction between state and federal defendants determines which framework applies. Learn more about federal civil rights claims.

Federal Tort Claims

The Federal Tort Claims Act allows certain injury and negligence claims against the United States that would otherwise be barred by sovereign immunity. The statute imposes strict conditions. Under 28 U.S.C. Section 2675, a claimant must first present an administrative claim to the responsible federal agency and receive a denial, or wait six months, before filing suit. The administrative claim must generally be presented within two years of when the claim accrued. Courts treat these requirements as jurisdictional, which means a missed step can end a case before it is heard. Learn more about Federal Tort Claims Act cases.

Civil Asset Forfeiture

The government can move to forfeit property it alleges is connected to unlawful activity through a civil in rem proceeding directed at the property itself. The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 governs most federal civil forfeitures. Under 18 U.S.C. Section 983, the government bears the burden of proving that property is subject to forfeiture by a preponderance of the evidence, and a claimant may assert an innocent owner defense. Deadlines for contesting a seizure are short and strictly enforced. Learn more about civil asset forfeiture.

Social Security Disability

A denied disability claim moves through a defined appeals sequence: reconsideration, a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, review by the Appeals Council, and finally a civil action in federal district court under 42 U.S.C. Section 405(g). Each level carries its own deadline, generally sixty days, and the federal court reviews the agency decision under the substantial evidence standard rather than deciding the claim anew. Learn more about Social Security disability appeals.

Health Care Law

Health care is among the most heavily regulated areas of federal law, governing providers, billing, program participation, and compliance obligations. Federal enforcement, audits, and administrative proceedings in this area follow the same administrative-law and agency-review structures that run through much of federal practice. Learn more about federal health care law.

Facing Federal Criminal Charges?

Federal criminal defense is handled through our criminal defense practice, where matters such as white collar offenses, federal drug charges, and grand jury investigations are addressed under the federal sentencing and procedural framework. If you are under federal investigation or facing federal charges, see our federal criminal defense page, or call our team directly.

Why Federal Practice Requires Federal Court Admission

Admission to a state bar does not by itself authorize an attorney to appear in federal court. Each federal district court and each court of appeals admits attorneys separately, and federal practice carries its own rules of procedure and local requirements. Retaining counsel who is admitted to the relevant federal courts is a practical necessity, not a formality.

Attorneys at Ratliff Jackson LLP are admitted to practice before the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, as well as the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. That admission allows us to represent clients directly in the federal courts that hear matters arising in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Who We Represent

We represent clients on the civil and regulatory side of the federal system, including:

• Individuals and businesses challenging a federal agency decision or defending against agency enforcement.
• People injured by the conduct of a federal employee or agency who are pursuing claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
• Property owners contesting a federal civil forfeiture.
• Individuals whose constitutional rights were violated by a government official.
• Claimants appealing a denial of federal disability benefits into federal court.

Frequently Asked Questions