Tenth Circuit· 10/21/2014

Citizen Center v. Gessler

Citations

770 F.3d 900
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20144
2014 WL 5334199

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that a claim for a prospective injunction wasn’t moot because the requested relief could affect future elections
recognizing the authority to dismiss a case as prudentially moot in the ballot tracing context, but choosing not to as the injury could still be remedied
addressing mootness before standing, explaining that “[b]ecause there is no mandatory sequencing of nonmerits issues, we have leeway to choose among threshold grounds for denying audience to a case on the merits” (brackets arid internal quotation marks omitted)
addressing mootness before standing, explaining that “[b]ecause there is no mandatory sequencing of nonmerits issues, we have leeway to choose among threshold grounds for denying audience to a case on the merits” (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted)
evaluating allegations in complaint when assessing whether plaintiff satisfied Walker test
“Allegations of a subjective ‘chill’ are not an adequate substitute for a claim of specific present objective harm or a threat of specific future harm.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Holmes, McKay, Bacharach

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

57 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.