Quantcast

Tag Archives: Standing

Civil Rights – Race Discrimination – Public Accommodation – Black Bike Week – Restaurant Closure — Civil Practice – Standing (access required)

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Inc. v. Molly Darcy, Inc. Although the defendant-restaurant was closed to everyone – not just African Americans – during Black Bike Week, plaintiffs allege that the restaurant’s decision to temporarily close to the public was “undertaken with racially discriminatory animus for the purpose of denying African Americans access to a place of public accommodation.” Plaintiffs have stated a claim of intentional racial discrimination.

Read More »

Bankruptcy – Civil Practice – Standing – Real Property – Mortgage Assignment – Insurance – Proceeds (access required)

Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC v. Riley Defendant is an insolvent Chapter 7 debtor; therefore, he has no standing to challenge the proofs of claim filed by plaintiff, the holder of the debtor’s notes and mortgages. Moreover, a borrower may not attack the validity of assignments of his loan due to his status as a third party to the assignment.

Read More »

Insurance – Breach of Contract – Standing – Unfair Trade Practices (access required)

Hill v. Canal Insurance Co. The plaintiff, an independent contractor/truck driver, is not a party to the insurance policy between the defendant-trucking company and the defendant-insurer; therefore, she lacks standing to bring a breach of contract claim based on the insurance policy. Defendants’ motions to dismiss are granted.

Read More »

Municipal – Civil Practice – Standing – FOIA — Labor & Employment – Public Employees – Severance Contract (access required)

Freemantle v. Preston Although the common law does not give a taxpayer standing to seek damages arising from a county council’s agreement to a $1,000,000 severance package for a county employee, the Freedom of Information Act gives the taxpayer standing to seek declaratory and injunctive relief.

Read More »

Environmental – Civil Practice – Standing – River Pollution – Public Utilities – Administrative – Licenses & Permits (access required)

Catawba Riverkeeper Foundation, Inc. v. South Carolina Electric & Gas Co. Even though defendant’s power plant is downstream from the areas mentioned in plaintiff’s articles of incorporation, plaintiff’s activities indicate a concern with the entire watershed of the Catawba River. Plaintiff has indicated a valid interest in the Wateree River region.

Read More »

Elections – UOCAVA Voters – Voting Rights Act — Civil Practice – Standing – Candidate (access required)

Somers v. South Carolina State Election Commission The plaintiff-candidate seeks to bring a Voting Rights Act challenge to the procedure used by South Carolina’s counties to mail ballots under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) after the S.C. Supreme Court delayed the mailing of state ballots while it reviewed candidates’ failure to timely file their statements of economic interests. However, since plaintiff has failed to articulate any concrete and particularized injury that she has incurred or is likely to incur as a result of the transmission of separate federal and state ballots, plaintiff has no standing as a candidate to pursue a § 5 Voting Rights Act claim. Nor has she alleged an injury in fact or shown how she was denied equal protection of the laws.

Read More »

Elections – UOCAVA Voters – Voting Rights Act – Civil Practice – Standing – Candidate (access required)

Somers v. South Carolina State Election Commission The plaintiff-candidate seeks to bring a Voting Rights Act challenge to the procedure used by South Carolina’s counties to mail ballots under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) after the S.C. Supreme Court delayed the mailing of state ballots while it reviewed candidates’ failure to timely file their statements of economic interests. However, since plaintiff has failed to articulate any concrete and particularized injury that she has incurred or is likely to incur as a result of the transmission of separate federal and state ballots, plaintiff has no standing as a candidate to pursue a § 5 Voting Rights Act claim. Nor has she alleged an injury in fact or shown how she was denied equal protection of the laws.

Read More »