SSIH Equipment S.A. v. U.S. ITC & Stewart-Warner Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that costs incurred with or without a city’s allegedly unconstitutional display of a crucifix cannot satisfy the expenditure requirement under municipal taxpayer standing
• finding that the plaintiffs’ claim is “undercut by their inability to show that tax revenue is spent for the crucifix” and “ although Township funds are spent maintaining the Park areas surrounding the crucifix, this cost would be incurred with or without the presence of the crucifix.”
• no taxpayer standing to challenge a crucifix in a park when government money was not used to buy or maintain it, and although funds are spent maintaining the park, that cost would be incurred without the crucifix
• to be entitled to summary judgment, “plaintiff must produce evidence [of standing] in the form of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) affidavits or documents . . . .”
• no taxpayer standing to challenge crucifix in public park because it was donated
• no taxpayer standing to challenge crucifix in public park because it was donated

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).