Stuart Kingston, Inc. v. Robinson

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the standards for evaluating standing under federal law “are generally the same as the standards for determining standing to bring a case or controversy within the courts of Delaware.”
• The claimant’s interest “must be distinguishable from the interest shared by other members of a class[.]”
• At the standing stage, courts are not “concerned . . . with the merits of the subject matter of the controversy.”
• “[S]tate courts apply the concept of standing as a matter of self-restraint to avoid the rendering of advisory opinions . . . .”
• “to achieve standing, the plaintiff’s interest in the controversy must be distinguishable from the interest shared by other members of a class or the public in general”
• prospective purchasers challenging third party’s exercise of first refusal right “have a concrete and distinct claim and if not permitted to assert it will suffer a direct injury”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).