Missouri Ex Rel. Nixon v. Craig

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that it is not enough that the plaintiffs “may be parties to the same sort of dispute in the future” (brackets and citation omitted)
• referring to availability of preliminary injunctions, emergency stays, and expedited appeals and holding that case was not one evading review when plaintiff did not seek expedited review and relief
• noting “no apparently reason why” a case could not be fully litigated before it became moot, given “the availability of judicial processes such as preliminary injunctions, emergency stays, and expedited appeals in reaching this decision”
• “The mootness doctrine is of such importance that ‘[i]t is the duty of counsel to bring to the federal tribunal’s attention, ‘without delay,’ facts that may raise a question of mootness.’ ” (emphasis in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).