Civil Procedure Commons^™

Revisiting The Lyons Den: Summers V. Earth Island Institute's Misuse Of Lyons's Realistic Threat Of Harm Standing Test, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 129 S. Ct. 1142 (2009), the majority and dissenting opinions disagreed about how to apply the “realistic threat” test set forth in Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 107 (1983)). According to Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in Summers, the plaintiff organizations did not have standing to obtain injunctive relief because they failed to prove that their members were likely in the near future to hike on government land on which the Forest Service conducted allegedly illegal sales of timber without public notice and comment and that the facts alleged by …

Standing Still In The Roberts Court, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

In 2007, The New York Times reported "limiting the ability of plaintiffs to bring or appeal lawsuits" had emerged as an early "theme" of the Roberts Court. The Wall Street Journal concurred, reporting "the biggest change under Chief Justice Roberts might not involve who wins on the merits" but "who gets through the courthouse door in the first place." An early consensus is emerging... that one effect of the Roberts Court is to make it more difficult for prospective plaintiffs to have their day in federal court.

Because standing decisions are more insulated from legislative revision than other sorts of …

God, Gaia, The Taxpayer And The Lorax: Standing, Justiciability, And Separation Of Powers After Massachusetts And Hein, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court decided two important standing cases during the October 2006 term: Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation and Massachusetts v. EPA. The latter is important for what it did, the former for what it did not do. Whereas Hein hewed closely - perhaps too closely - to prior standing precendents, the Massachusetts decision substantially departed from existing precedent and established a new doctrine of special solicitude to state standing. Both decisions involved generalized grievances about federal government policies that affect citizens as a whole, but point in opposite directions. In many respects the opinions are in significant tension …

God, Gaia, The Taxpayer, And The Lorax: Standing, Justiciability, And Separation Of Powers After Massachusetts And Hein, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court considered standing in two high-profile cases during the October 2006 term: Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation and Massachusetts v. EPA. Both were 5-4 decisions in which the Court decided along traditional, ideological lines, and both decisions may provide an indication of the future direction of the Supreme Court.

In Hein, a five-Justice majority denied taxpayer standing to challenge the Bush Administration's so-called "faith-based initiatives" as a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. In Massachusetts, the Court broke new ground as it took several steps in a decidedly "liberal" direction. The five Justice …

Non-Pecuniary Interests And The Injudicious Limits Of Appellate Standing In Bankruptcy, S. Todd Brown

Journal Articles

Standing to appeal bankruptcy court orders today is limited to those with a pecuniary interest. This prudential limitation is based on the person aggrieved requirement of Section 39(c) of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 - a requirement that was not included in the Bankruptcy Code. This article examines the extensive differences between the Act and the Code, the potential justifications for extending the pecuniary interest test in spite of the omission of the person aggrieved requirement, and the potential ramifications for parties and the integrity of the bankruptcy process. This analysis suggests that standing to appeal bankruptcy orders should be …

Civil Practice And Procedure, John R. Walk, Michael R. Spitzer Ii

University of Richmond Law Review

This article will summarize recent developments of interest to practitioners handling civil cases in the courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Specifically included are relevant decisions of the Supreme Court of Virginia dating from opinions announced on June 10, 2004 to those announced on April 22, 2005; changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia announced during the same time period; and legislation enacted by the Virginia General Assembly at its 2005 Session, effective July 1, 2005.

Civil Procedure: Time To Stand Back: Unnecessary Gate-Keeping To Oklahoma Courts, Stasha D. Mcbride

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Standing To Intervene, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court has rarely considered what applicants must show to intervene as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) since the Court amended the provision in 1966. This dearth of Supreme Court treatment has meant that primary responsibility for interpreting Rule 24(a)(2) has devolved upon the lower federal courts. Many of these courts and numerous commentators have recognized that it is very difficult to identify precisely what the Rule demands of those that seek to intervene of right. During much of the last quarter century, however, the federal judiciary agreed about one important proposition: Rule 24(a)(2) does …

An Independent Public Law, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

This Article analyzes the application of numerous Federal Rules in public law litigation to show how the resurrection of private law approaches and hostility toward public interest litigants serves to disadvantage public interest litigants. The assessment is intended to discourage such future enforcement of the Federal Rules and analogous judicial treatment in other areas of public law. The Article is also meant to foster greater appreciation of public law and the articulation of a larger complement of public law principles so as to facilitate the growth of an independent public law.

Justice Scalia: Standing, Environmental Law And The Supreme Court, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

President Reagan's appointment of Antonin Scalia to the United States Supreme Court raises concern among liberals that Justice Scalia will help lead the Court away from a number of liberal positions toward a new conservatism. The Reagan Administration's requirement that judicial appointments advance the Administration's preference for judicial restraint and strict constructionism enhances this concern. These new executive requirements mean that federal courts should accord greater authority to the democratically elected branches of the government. Justice Scalia's primary areas of study, administrative law and separation of powers, reflect his adherence to judicial self-restraint.

One aspect of administrative law and separation …

Everybody's Doing It—But Who Should Be? Standing To Make A Disqualification Motion Based On An Attorney's Representation Of A Client With Interests Adverse To Those Of A Former Client, Andra Barmash Greene

Seattle University Law Review

This article examines the issue of standing for disqualification motions based on an attorney’s representation of a client with interest adverse to those of a former client of the attorney. The article focuses on the appropriateness of granting standing to nonclients to make disqualification motions, particularly when the former client has not objected to the attorney’s alleged conflict of interest. First, the article examines the Model Code of Professional Responsibility provisions implicated when an attorney is charged with a conflict of interest between present and former clients to discern what rights the Code wanted to safeguard. Second, this article considers …

Notice By Citizen Plaintiffs In Environmental Litigation, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note evaluates judicial handling of citizen suits tainted by defective notice. After reviewing the legislative history of the citizen suit provisions, the Note presents an array of judicial responses to defective notice and classifies decisions by their stringency in applying the notice provision. In the final section, the Note argues that Congress's purpose in requiring notice should determine the limits of judicial tolerance of defective notice. It concludes that courts should dismiss citizen suits unless actual notice of intent to sue, whether or not in the form specified by EPA regulations, was given sixty days before the filing of …

Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …

Gonzales V. Automatic Employees Credit Union, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights For Natural Objects, Tom R. Moore

Florida State University Law Review

By Christopher D. Stone. Los Altos, California: William Kaufman, Inc. 1974. Pp. xvii, 102. $6.95.

Constitutional Law - Standing - The Zone Of Interest Test Of Data Processing Held Inapplicable To Plaintiff's Standing In A Suit Between Private Parties, Michael S. Burg

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Procedural Problems Of Class Suits, Joseph J. Simeone

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of this article is to discuss numerous aspects of the class device, to discuss the many procedural problems confronting court and counsel, to determine the effectiveness of one type of class suit-the spurious-and in the conclusion, to propose legislation for a new rule independent of the rules regarding class actions, a remedy which would more effectively permit the dispatch of numerous claims arising from similar fact patterns.