Circuit courts across the country have grappled with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on standing last year in Spokeo v. Robins, granting both sides some victories and setbacks here and there. But on Tuesday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the plaintiffs hit a home run.
Last year, the Supreme Court ruled in Spokeo that a plaintiff must show more than a mere procedural violation to establish standing to sue in federal courts. Rather, the court held, a plaintiff must allege an injury that is “particularized” and “concrete.” The court said the plaintiff in the case, Thomas Robins, had established injuries particular to him when he claimed the online “people search” website Spokeo published inaccurate information about him. But it remanded the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to conduct a more thorough analysis over whether his claimed injury was “concrete.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
