In re Parental Rights to K.M.M.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that mere speculation about the potential influence of an agency authorization on “choices made by independent actors not before the court does not suffice to plead” associational standing (internal citations and quotations omitted)
• explaining that courts “have discretion to choose between non-merits grounds for dismissing a suit” (citing Sinochem, 549 U.S. at 431)
• explaining that federal law “does not prohibit doctors from prescribing an FDA-approved drug (say, a chemotherapy drug approved to treat leukemia) for an ‘off-label’ use (say, treatment of other cancers)”
• extending “Twombly’s plausibility test” to a 12(b)(1) motion and instructing courts to “[a]ccept[] as true the complaint’s factual allegations (as opposed to its legal conclusions
• observing that historical practice should support application of associational standing
• identifying the open question of whether members may rely on a judgment if the organization wins or be bound if it loses

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).