Post-Spokeo, Standing Challenges Remain Unpredictable

Law360, New York (October 26, 2016, 2:45 PM EDT) -- Ronnie Solomon

Tyler Newby The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Spokeo v. Robins[1] was handed down just a few months ago, clarifying the constitutional requirement that a plaintiff show an injury in fact to establish standing to sue in federal court. Since then, new legal issues have sprouted. Among them is whether an alleged statutory violation of a state statute — as opposed to a federal one — alone suffices as a concrete injury in fact and confers Article III standing. A number of courts have recently weighed in, yet the treatment of the issue has not been uniform. This article...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!


Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!