| Line 7: |
Line 7: |
| | *''Ward v. Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist.'', 393 F.3d 599 (5th Cir. 2004) (establishing that “prudential limitations on standing” require that “a litigant ... must assert his or her own legal rights and interests and cannot rest a claim to relief on the legal rights or interest of third parties”) | | *''Ward v. Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist.'', 393 F.3d 599 (5th Cir. 2004) (establishing that “prudential limitations on standing” require that “a litigant ... must assert his or her own legal rights and interests and cannot rest a claim to relief on the legal rights or interest of third parties”) |
| | *''Warth v. Seldin'', 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (standing cannot be based on the interests of others) | | *''Warth v. Seldin'', 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (standing cannot be based on the interests of others) |
| | + | *''U.S. v. Hays'', 515 U.S. 737 (1995) ([[standing]] is a threshold jurisdictional question) |
| | + | |
| | == First Amendment and State Action == | | == First Amendment and State Action == |
| | *Afzal v. Am. Bd. of Internal Med., 2022 WL 2447115 (3d Cir. July 6, 2022) (defendant not a state actor) | | *Afzal v. Am. Bd. of Internal Med., 2022 WL 2447115 (3d Cir. July 6, 2022) (defendant not a state actor) |
| Line 23: |
Line 25: |
| | *Goussis v. Kimball, 813 F. Supp. 352 (E.D. Pa. 1993) (not a state actor) | | *Goussis v. Kimball, 813 F. Supp. 352 (E.D. Pa. 1993) (not a state actor) |
| | *Munsif v. Cassel, 331 F. App’x 954 (3d Cir. 2009) (not a state actor) | | *Munsif v. Cassel, 331 F. App’x 954 (3d Cir. 2009) (not a state actor) |
| | + | *McMahon v. Fenves, 946 F.3d 266 (5th Cir. 2020) (denying [[standing]] to assert [[First Amendment]] infringement on others, and denying objection to a university's relocation of monuments of the [[Confederacy]]) |
| | | | |
| | == Antitrust == | | == Antitrust == |
| Line 57: |
Line 60: |
| | *La. Div. Sons of Confederate Veterans v. City of Natchitoches, 370 F. Supp. 3d 692 (W.D. La. 2019) | | *La. Div. Sons of Confederate Veterans v. City of Natchitoches, 370 F. Supp. 3d 692 (W.D. La. 2019) |
| | *McCormack v. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Assoc., 845 F.2d 1338 (5th Cir. 1988) | | *McCormack v. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Assoc., 845 F.2d 1338 (5th Cir. 1988) |
| − | *McMahon v. Fenves, 946 F.3d 266 (5th Cir. 2020) (denying [[standing]] to assert [[First Amendment]] infringement on others, and denying objection to a university's relocation of monuments of the [[Confederacy]])
| |
| | *Morris v. Dillard Dep’t Stores, Inc., 277 F.3d 743 (5th Cir. 2001) | | *Morris v. Dillard Dep’t Stores, Inc., 277 F.3d 743 (5th Cir. 2001) |
| | *Nelson v. Cauley, 2005 WL 415144 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 22, 2005) | | *Nelson v. Cauley, 2005 WL 415144 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 22, 2005) |
| Line 75: |
Line 77: |
| | *Texas Beef Cattle Co. v. Green, 921 S.W.2d 203 (Tex. 1996) | | *Texas Beef Cattle Co. v. Green, 921 S.W.2d 203 (Tex. 1996) |
| | *Transource Int’l, Inc. v. Trinity Indus., Inc., 725 F.2d 274 (5th Cir. 1984) | | *Transource Int’l, Inc. v. Trinity Indus., Inc., 725 F.2d 274 (5th Cir. 1984) |
| − | *''U.S. v. Hays'', 515 U.S. 737 (1995) ([[standing]] is a threshold jurisdictional question)
| |
| | *Waggoner v. Denbury Onshore, L.L.C., 612 F. App’x 734 (5th Cir. 2015) | | *Waggoner v. Denbury Onshore, L.L.C., 612 F. App’x 734 (5th Cir. 2015) |
| | *''Wal-Mart Stores v. Sturges'', 52 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. 2001) ([[Texas]] recognizes tortious interference with existing business relations and tortious interference with prospective business relations) | | *''Wal-Mart Stores v. Sturges'', 52 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. 2001) ([[Texas]] recognizes tortious interference with existing business relations and tortious interference with prospective business relations) |