State ex rel. Gross v. Henderson

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that HHS’s predecessor had “terminat[ed]” a grantee’s project according to then -existing regulations because the agency withdrew support from the grantee prior to the pr oject’s “date of completion”
• finding the plaintiff's assertion \that its good name and reputation have been damaged\ to be an injury \capable of direct redress\ through the requested declaratory and injunctive relief
• distinguishing “a grantee engaged in an existing relationship,” with “an applicant initially seeking a government grant” whose “application denial will have little, if any, effect on its good name and reputation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).