Coalition for the Environment v. John A. Volpe, Coalition for the Environment v. Linclay Development Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a proposed development that would increase pollution and traffic and limit plaintiffs’ views was a cognizable injury that deprived plaintiffs of aesthetic and psychological benefit
• “The court is not to consider the weight or significance of the alleged injury, only whether it exists.”
• parties had standing to challenge private development which allegedly would affect open views and the \aesthetic and psychological benefit\ of the land's existing condition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).