Flintkote Co. v. State Division of Human Rights

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the plaintiffs were not “particular” beneficiaries of the statute even though they “undoubtedly st[ood] to benefit” from the statute
• observing that “the Legislature clearly knew how to include a private right of action when it intended to do so, and the omission of any similar language in [the statutes in question] evinces a legislative intent not to provide for a private right of action”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).