Southern District Civil Practice Roundup

Stricter Standards for Standing

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

In their Southern District Civil Practice Roundup, Edward M. Spiro and Judith L. Mogul write: Following the U.S. Supreme Court's May 2016 decision in 'Spokeo v. Robins', courts have been re-examining whether plaintiffs seeking statutory damages, particularly under various consumer protection laws, have Article III standing to pursue their claims. With guidance from the Second Circuit's post-'Spokeo' decision in 'Strubel v. Comenity Bank', courts in the Southern District of New York are beginning to flesh out the new approach to standing in such cases.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202779456656

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.