Zone Of Interests Test

500 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Simmons v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  943 F.2d 11· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-27
  The court held that the petitioner lacked standing to seek review of the ICC's order, based on a prior controlling decision of the court.
• The Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. The Agric. Stabilization & Conservation Serv.
  941 F.2d 667· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-08
  The court vacated the district court's judgment and remanded the case because a subsequent amendment to the Swampbuster Act provided an explicit good-faith exemption, which applied retroactively.
• Dist. 2 v. Burnley
  936 F.2d 284· 6th Cir.· 1991-06-25
  The court held that the union lacked standing to challenge the government's failure to stop the operation of vessels allegedly sold foreign because the union's asserted injury did not fall within the zone of interests protected by the relevant Jones Act proviso.
• Simmons v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  900 F.2d 1023· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-16
  The court held that the petitioners lacked standing to challenge the ICC's decision to grant an abandonment exemption for a rail line segment.
• Nat'l Fed'n OF Fed. Emps. v. Cheney
  892 F.2d 98· D.C. Cir.· 1989-12-22
• Arjay Assocs., Inc. v. Bush
  891 F.2d 894· Fed. Cir.· 1989-12-07
  The appellants lack standing to bring this action because they are not within the zone of interests protected by the Bill of Attainder clause and are not proper proponents of TMC's alleged rights.
• Mich. Consol. GAS Co. v. Energy Regulatory Admin.
  889 F.2d 1110· D.C. Cir.· 1989-11-17
  The court held that Michigan Consolidated Gas (MichCon) lacks standing to challenge the Energy Regulatory Administration's order authorizing National Steel Corporation to import natural gas from Canada.
• Irwin D. Bross v. Turnage
  889 F.2d 1256· 2d Cir.· 1989-11-17
  The court held that the plaintiff's asserted interests were not within the zone of interests protected by the Act and that he failed to demonstrate a protected entitlement for his due process claim.
• Bubis v. Blanton
  885 F.2d 317· 6th Cir.· 1989-09-14
  The court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring an antitrust claim because his alleged business interest was illegal under state law due to non-disclosure, and he had no interest in the liquor license itself.
• Allen v. Consol. City of Jacksonville
  719 F. Supp. 1532· M.D. Fla.· 1989-06-02
  The court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the resolution, and alternatively, that the resolution did not violate the Establishment Clause and thus a preliminary injunction was not warranted.
• Boca Raton Mausoleum, Inc. v. State
  511 So. 2d 1060· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-08-18
  This case addresses standing requirements for interested parties to participate in administrative proceedings challenging cemetery licensing decisions under Florida's Cemetery Act. The court reversed in part and affirmed in part the dismissal of appellants' petition, holding that
• Fed'n for Am. Immigr. Reform v. Meese
  643 F. Supp. 983· S.D. Fla.· 1986-09-12
  The court held that the plaintiff organization lacked standing to challenge the Attorney General's application of the Cuban Adjustment Act and that the Act does not require Cuban nationals' status adjustments to be charged against numerical immigration quotas.
• COX Cable Tucson, Inc. v. Ladd
  795 F.2d 1479· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-01
  The court held that Cox Cable lacked standing to challenge the Copyright Office's regulation because it failed to provide evidence that its signals were properly authorized or grandfathered under FCC rules.
• Dominion Nat'l Bank v. Olsen
  771 F.2d 108· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-20
  A state tax that discriminates against interstate commerce by favoring domestic businesses is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause, and the Tax Injunction Act does not bar federal jurisdiction when no plain, speedy, and efficient remedy exists in state court.
• Citizens Coordinating Comm. on Friendship Heights, Inc. v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  765 F.2d 1169· D.C. Cir.· 1985-07-05
  A corporation cannot claim standing under the Clean Water Act for aesthetic injury, and litigation costs are only recoverable for claims brought under the Act, not for joined common law tort claims.
• Maier v. The Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & the United States
  735 F.2d 220· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-08
  The dissenting judge argues that a complainant to the FCC who is not a listener and whose complaint about a television station's violation of the fairness doctrine is rejected by the FCC lacks standing to petition for judicial review.
• Practicing Doctors of Acupuncture v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg.
  S.D. Fla.· 1981-07-10
  The court held that the plaintiffs, practicing doctors of acupuncture, lacked standing to sue because they failed to demonstrate a direct injury in fact resulting from the challenged act.
• Carr Cent. Neighborhood Corp. v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  565 F.2d 528· 8th Cir.· 1977-11-16
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding the convention center consistent with the urban renewal plan and HUD not obligated to provide mortgage insurance.