Stone v. BOARD OF ELECTION COM'RS FOR CHICAGO

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 appeal of the decision to deny a preliminary injunction was moot “[b]ecause the election has taken place”
• concluding that a request to enjoin a city from enforcing a signature requirement during a specific election was moot once election occurred
• concluding that appeal was moot because the appellant re- quested an injunction against a municipal election that had already taken place
• because the plaintiff was able to obtain review of the signature requirement before the next applicable election, the case did not fall within the “capable of repetition, yet evading review” exception
• because the plaintiff was able to obtain review of the signature requirement before the next applicable election, the case did not fall within the “capable of repetition, yet evading review” exception
• “Because the election has taken place, Plaintiffs’ [interlocutory] appeal is now moot.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).