Product manufacturers increasingly face the phenomenon of ‘no-injury’ lawsuits: lawsuits commenced by plaintiffs who have suffered neither a personal injury nor property damage as a claimed result of their use of a manufacturer’s product. Such plaintiffs sue because they, or their attorneys, believe that some or all of the products may contain an as-of-yet unmanifested safety defect.
Yet US federal courts are “courts of limited jurisdiction”. They derive authority to act from Article III of the US Constitution, which requires that there be a “case or controversy” between parties in order to litigate actions in federal court. Inherent to the ‘case or controversy’ requirement is that plaintiffs must establish constitutional standing to pursue their claims. Who is making these claims and why? Read this article for the answers.
The Legal Examiner and our Affiliate Network strive to be the place you look to for news, context, and more, wherever your life intersects with the law.
Comments for this article are closed.