To be an “aggrieved person,” it is not enough that a plaintiff “might technically be injured in an Article III sense.” ...Rather, a plaintiff has a right to sue only if (1) he falls within the zone of interests protected by the statute and (2) his injury was proximately caused by the statutory violation he alleges."This follows on the heels of a 2014 decision by the Supreme Court, Lexmark International v. Static Control Components, that led to the two-part test above.
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
Supreme Court will Review Disparate Impact Again
The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari to review a decision by the Eleventh Circuit related to whether a municipality can sue lenders under FHA. This is another decision that may limit the prevalence of disparate impact claims and offer opportunities for other areas - such as insurance - to limit the application of disparate impact. From the petition:
Posted by ABIA Staff at 1:18 PM