Opinion No. Oag 42-79, (1979)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an ADA plaintiff had standing to pursue injunctive relief based on the complaints plausible allegations that plaintiff intended to visit the market in the future
• concluding that ADA tester could seek injunctive relief after encountering architectural barriers at interstate-adjacent marketplace, based on plausible intentions to return there during trips between his Delaware home and Baltimore-Washington, D.C. area
• stating that a plaintiff’s litigation history is not grounds for finding a lack of standing
• stating that a plaintiff’s litigation history is not grounds for finding a lack of standing
• noting a distance of forty miles was not “fatal” to standing when considering other factors
• adopting “the Daniels principle—that when an ADA plaintiff has alleged a past injury at a particular location, his plausible intentions to thereafter return to that location are sufficient to demonstrate the likelihood of future injury”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).