Dover Historical Society v. City of Dover Planning Commission

How courts have described this case

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

• clarifying that the Delaware standing requirements are generally the same as the federal standing requirements laid out in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife
• noting that the standards for evaluating standing under federal law “are generally the same as the standards for determining standing to bring a case or controversy within the courts of Delaware”
• noting that “[tjhis Court has recognized that the Lujan requirements for establishing standing under Article III to bring an action in federal court are generally the same as the standards for determining standing to bring a case or controversy within the courts of Delaware”
• noting that “[t]his Court has recognized that the Lujan requirements for establishing standing under Article III to bring an action in federal court are generally the same as the standards for determining standing to bring a case or controversy within the courts of Delaware”
• standing conferred on landowner residents of Historic District of Dover based on their \enforceable right in the 'aesthetic benefit' derived from the Historic District as a whole\
• contrasting the Rule 12(b)(6) standard in the context of a petition for writ of certiorari with the standard for summary judgment only for the purpose of focusing on Rule 12(b)(6)’s more relaxed standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).