Hassell v. Harris

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that breach of contract pleaded concrete injury in fact even though plaintiff did not allege that defendant’s breach caused her pecuniary harm
• holding that a breach of contract, standing alone, pleads a concrete injury in fact
• concluding “traditional and recent precedent . . . reflect that a breach of contract is a sufficient injury for standing purposes”
• concluding that plaintiff adequately pleaded Article III standing where she alleged that because of the defendant’s breach of contract, her insurer had been billed “at a daily rate of $120 for services that she alleges neither she nor her physician had authorized”
• stating that “traditional and recent precedent arising from both the Fifth Circuit and the Supreme Court reflect that a breach of contract is a sufficient injury for standing purposes”
• “[R]endering an award of damages in favor of Denning does not redress her insurer’s injury of being subjected to AIS’s unauthorized billing practices.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).