Chambers v. Lautenbaugh

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that resident taxpayer, without showing any interest or injury peculiar to itself, may bring action to enjoin illegal expenditure of public funds raised for governmental purposes
• holding taxpayer had standing to challenge illegal expenditure of public funds
• stating that “[a]s an aspect of jurisdiction . . . , standing requires that a litigant have such a personal stake in the outcome of a controversy as to warrant invocation of a court’s jurisdiction and justify the exercise of the court’s remedial powers on the litigant’s behalf’
• stating that person seeking to restrain act of public board or officer must show special injury peculiar to himself or herself aside from and independent of general injury to public unless it involves illegal expenditure of public funds or increase in burden of taxation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).