Skip to main content
Fifth Circuit· 2/6/1996

Cook v. Reno

Citations

  • 74 F.3d 97
  • 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 1671
  • 1996 WL 21378

How courts have described this case

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

  • \[T]he ultimate merits of the suit are not a consideration when deciding standing.\
  • “[I]f jurisdiction is lacking, then the court has no authority to consider the merits.”
  • “Before ruling on the merits of the case, it is imperative that the court first determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear the suit; if jurisdiction is lacking, then the court has no authority to consider the merits.”
  • “Before ruling on the merits of the case, it is imperative that the court first determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear the suit; if jurisdiction is lacking, then the court has no authority to consider the merits.”
  • “Before ruling on the merits of the case, it is imperative that the court first determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear the suit; if jurisdiction is lacking, then the court has no authority to consider the merits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Politz, Wisdom, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Cook v. Reno

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.