M.C. Sungaila, Marco Pulido Author Legal Opinion Letter in Washington Legal Foundation: Spokeo v. Robins and the Wrinkle of Standing Under State Law


Partner M.C. Sungaila filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Spokeo v. Robins, and she has also briefed post-Spokeo standing issues in Eric B. Fromer Chiropractic Inc. v. Molina Healthcare of California.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo v. Robins, it is not enough for a plaintiff suing in federal court “to allege that a defendant has violated a right created by a statute.” Rather, to determine whether a plaintiff has standing to sue under Article III, a federal court must further “ascertain whether the plaintiff suffered a concrete injury-in-fact due to the violation.”

This Legal Opinion Letter discusses two developing post-Spokeo trends: (1) litigation of federal statutory claims in state courts, where standing requirements may differ from those under Article III; and (2) the application of Spokeo to dismiss state-law statutory claims in federal court.

Excerpted from a Washington Legal Foundation Legal Opinion Letter. To read the full letter, click here.

Related Practices

Email Disclaimer