Brandt v. Chalkboard, Inc.
Brandt v. Chalkboard, Inc., 498 U.S. 980 (1990)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 7 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding that standing requires organization to allege devotion of resources to activities other than litigation costs)
-
(discretion where there were no specific mandatory guidelines for the government's identification of the remains of servicemen)
-
(fair housing agency has standing if its time and money were deflected from counseling to legal efforts against discrimination)
-
(section 113 precluded judicial review of the procedure employed to select a remedial plan)
-
(“An organization cannot, of course, manufacture the injury necessaiy to maintain a suit from its expenditure of resources on that very suit. Were the rule otherwise, any litigant could create injury in fact by bringing a case, and Article III would present no real limitation.”)
Cited by 79 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Fairchild Semiconductor Corp. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency
- Equal Rights Center v. Post Properties, Inc.
- Baylson v. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- Heart of America Northwest v. Westinghouse Hanford Co.
- National Treasury Employees Union v. United States
- Housing Opportunities Made Equal, Inc. v. The Cincinnati Enquirer, Inc., a Division of Gannett Co., Inc.
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.