Add to ORKGThe author examines the development and current status of third-party standing in the federal courts, with special attention to its justification in light of the Supreme Court\u27s decisions on mootness in class actions. Professor Rohr suggests that for the sake of clarity, economy, and consistency of approach, federal courts should grant third-party standing to any litigant who appears reasonably likely to give adequate representation to the interests of the third parties whose rights the litigant wishes to assert
In recent years, legislatures and their members have increasingly asserted standing to sue other bra...
Although the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years has reaffirmed the substantive force of the Tenth Am...
From the Introduction In the last Term at the United States Supreme Court [2022], standing was the c...
The author examines the development and current status of third-party standing in the federal courts...
When can a litigant assert someone else’s rights in federal court? The courts currently purport to a...
Third-party standing is relevant to a wide range of constitutional and statutory cases. The Supreme ...
In Kowalski v. Tesmer, the Supreme Court held that attorneys lack standing to assert the rights of i...
No jurisdictional principle is more fundamental to the federal judiciary than the doctrine of standi...
This article examines third party standing cases in the United States, Canada, and Australia. It dem...
Article III limits the federal courts to deciding cases and controversies, and this limitation has g...
Traditional constitutional theory posits a narrow conception of the issues that a litigant properly ...
It is the purpose of this article to examine the statutory provisions, and the regulations and pract...
Unless the plaintiff has a personal stake in the outcome, Article III of the United States Constitut...
The conventional understanding of mootness doctrine is that it operates as a mandatory bar to fede...
The law of contracts for the benefit of third persons has gone through the same development in the f...
In recent years, legislatures and their members have increasingly asserted standing to sue other bra...
Although the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years has reaffirmed the substantive force of the Tenth Am...
From the Introduction In the last Term at the United States Supreme Court [2022], standing was the c...
The author examines the development and current status of third-party standing in the federal courts...
When can a litigant assert someone else’s rights in federal court? The courts currently purport to a...
Third-party standing is relevant to a wide range of constitutional and statutory cases. The Supreme ...
In Kowalski v. Tesmer, the Supreme Court held that attorneys lack standing to assert the rights of i...
No jurisdictional principle is more fundamental to the federal judiciary than the doctrine of standi...
This article examines third party standing cases in the United States, Canada, and Australia. It dem...
Article III limits the federal courts to deciding cases and controversies, and this limitation has g...
Traditional constitutional theory posits a narrow conception of the issues that a litigant properly ...
It is the purpose of this article to examine the statutory provisions, and the regulations and pract...
Unless the plaintiff has a personal stake in the outcome, Article III of the United States Constitut...
The conventional understanding of mootness doctrine is that it operates as a mandatory bar to fede...
The law of contracts for the benefit of third persons has gone through the same development in the f...
In recent years, legislatures and their members have increasingly asserted standing to sue other bra...
Although the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years has reaffirmed the substantive force of the Tenth Am...
From the Introduction In the last Term at the United States Supreme Court [2022], standing was the c...