43 Cited authorities

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,840 times 138 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA
568 U.S. 398 (2013) Cited 3,057 times 169 Legal Analyses
Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"
Bennett v. Spear
520 U.S. 154 (1997) Cited 3,688 times 35 Legal Analyses
Holding that a Final Biological Opinion has "legal consequences," even though the action agency is not legally obligated to accept the opinion's recommendations or conclusions, because the opinion "alter the legal regime to which the action agency is subject"
Beard v. Banks
548 U.S. 521 (2006) Cited 1,693 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that encouraging progress toward rehabilitation serves legitimate penological objectives
Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr
518 U.S. 470 (1996) Cited 2,417 times 35 Legal Analyses
Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"
Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
505 U.S. 504 (1992) Cited 2,402 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that an express warranty was not a "requirement ... imposed under State law" because the obligation was imposed by the warrantor
Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman
455 U.S. 363 (1982) Cited 2,029 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that an allegation in the complaint that the plaintiff organization "has had to devote significant resources to identify and counteract the defendant's" illegal practices was sufficient to confer standing to the organization in its own right at the pleading stage
Mims v. Arrow Fin. Servs. LLC
565 U.S. 368 (2012) Cited 648 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that "Congress did not deprive federal courts of federal-question jurisdiction over private TCPA suits"
Howlett v. Rose
496 U.S. 356 (1990) Cited 1,373 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the State and arms of the State . . . are not subject to suit under § 1983"
Astoria Federal S. L. Ass'n. v. Solimino
501 U.S. 104 (1991) Cited 1,252 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,775 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Stoops v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

43 Cited authorities

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"

Holding that a Final Biological Opinion has "legal consequences," even though the action agency is not legally obligated to accept the opinion's recommendations or conclusions, because the opinion "alter the legal regime to which the action agency is subject"

Holding that encouraging progress toward rehabilitation serves legitimate penological objectives

Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"

Holding that an express warranty was not a "requirement ... imposed under State law" because the obligation was imposed by the warrantor

Holding that an allegation in the complaint that the plaintiff organization "has had to devote significant resources to identify and counteract the defendant's" illegal practices was sufficient to confer standing to the organization in its own right at the pleading stage

Holding that "Congress did not deprive federal courts of federal-question jurisdiction over private TCPA suits"

Holding that "the State and arms of the State . . . are not subject to suit under § 1983"

Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit