District of Columbia· 7/28/2015
Austin-Spearman v. AARP & AARP Services Inc.
Citations
- 119 F. Supp. 3d 1
- 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98069
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- dismissing breach of express contract claim because the promises plaintiff alleged appeared nowhere in the actual privacy policy provided by plaintiff
- “But conclusory statements regarding a plaintiff’s own beliefs and expectations are not sufficient to support an alleged ‘overpayment’ injury[.]”
- “But conclusory statements regarding a plaintiff’s own beliefs and expectations are not sufficient to support an alleged ‘overpayment’ injury[.]”
- the court “need not accept factual inferences drawn by plaintiffs if those inferences are not supported by facts alleged in the complaint, nor must the Court accept plaintiff’s legal conclusions.”
- plaintiff lacked standing where she “received the benefit of her bargain”
- “This Court finds that, having not established that she actually lost any of the value of her membership, [the plaintiff] has not plausibly claimed that she overpaid for the AARP membership agreement such that she was injured economically and now has standing to sue.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Attias v. Carefirst, Inc.D.C. Circuit· 2019-01-30· cited 30×
- Feldman v. BowserD.C. Circuit· 2018-05-30· cited 5×
- Feldman v. BowserDistrict of Columbia· 2018-05-30
- Attias v. Carefirst, Inc.District of Columbia· 2021-01-29
- Wheeler v. Panini America, Inc.District of Columbia· 2022-11-17
- Gila River Indian Community v. BecerraDistrict of Columbia· 2024-05-31
- Keown v. International Association of Sheet Metal Air Rail Transportation WorkersDistrict of Columbia· 2024-09-19
- Pope v. Yazam Inc.District of Columbia· 2026-03-31
Cites
34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court· 2009-05-18· cited 149,772×
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court· 2007-05-21· cited 146,720×
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court· 1992-06-12· cited 24,791×
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court· 1984-09-18· cited 4,763×
- Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights OrganizationSupreme Court· 1976-06-01· cited 3,605×
- Clapper v. Amnesty International USASupreme Court· 2013-02-26· cited 3,172×
- Charles Kowal v. MCI Communications CorporationD.C. Circuit· 1994-03-01· cited 1,980×
- Dolly Kyle Browning and Direct Outstanding Creations Corporation v. William Jefferson ClintonD.C. Circuit· 2002-08-01· cited 1,521×
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier ChurchD.C. Circuit· 1997-07-18· cited 1,499×
- Sparrow, Victor H. v. United Airlines IncD.C. Circuit· 2000-06-27· cited 1,335×
- Florida Audubon Society v. Lloyd M. Bentsen, Secretary of the Treasury, and Margaret Richardson, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue ServiceD.C. Circuit· 1996-08-20· cited 631×
- Thomas, Oscar v. Principi, AnthonyD.C. Circuit· 2005-01-14· cited 544×
- General Motors Corp. v. Environmental Protection AgencyD.C. Circuit· 2004-04-02· cited 400×
- Doe v. ChaoSupreme Court· 2004-02-24· cited 396×
- Scolaro v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and EthicsDistrict of Columbia· 2000-06-14· cited 388×
- City of Waukesha v. Environmental Protection AgencyD.C. Circuit· 2003-02-25· cited 306×
- Lozano v. AT & T Wireless Services, Inc.Ninth Circuit· 2007-09-20· cited 302×
- Trustees of the Philadelphia Baptist Ass'n v. Hart's ExecutorsSupreme Court· 1819-02-18· cited 217×
- Birdsong v. Apple, Inc.Ninth Circuit· 2009-12-30· cited 183×
- Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. United States NavyD.C. Circuit· 2008-08-01· cited 175×
Other cases named Austin-Spearman v. AARP & AARP Services Inc.
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.