The Meaning Of Spokeo, 365 Days And 430 Decisions Later

Law360, New York (May 15, 2017, 5:02 PM EDT) -- It has been one year since the U.S. Supreme Court's much-anticipated decision in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins.[1] The Spokeo decision analyzed the standing requirement of Article III in the context of federal statutory claims — particularly addressing whether Congress may confer standing on a plaintiff who suffers no concrete harm and seeks only statutory damages. In the decision, the Supreme Court clarified that "Article III standing requires a concrete injury even in the context of a statutory violation," noting that a plaintiff cannot "allege a bare procedural violation, divorced from any concrete harm, and satisfy the injury in fact requirement of 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!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

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?
Beta
Ask a question!