Conservation Law Found. v. LePage

2 Citing cases

  1. Storie v. Land Use Planning Comm'n

    Civil Action AP-20-0006 (Me. Super. Sep. 14, 2021)

    The Court will treat the factual allegations of the Stories' petition/complaint as true and view those facts and the reasonable inferences that can be drawn from them in the light favorable to the plaintiff/petitioner for purposes of determining whether the Stories have sufficiently shown that they have standing to sue at this stage of the proceedings. See e.g. Conservation Law Found, v, LePage, Cum-CV-18-0089, 2018 Me. Super. LEXIS 156, at *25 (July 20, 2018) ("It is the allegations of the complaints that determine standing for purposes of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion"); Cedars Nursing Case Ctr. v. Me. HHS, Cum-AP-15-0021, 2015 Me. Super, LEXIS 147, at *2 (Aug. 24, 2015) (treating the allegations contained in the complaint as true and admitted on a motion to dismiss due to lack of standing); see also generally Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561 (1992) ("[a]t the pleading stage, general factual allegations of injury resulting from the defendant's conduct may suffice" to establish federal constitutional standing "for on a motion to dismiss we presume that general allegations .embrace those specific facts that are necessary to support the claim"). Standing is a threshold requirement to pursue litigation in the courts-the term is used to refer to whether the "party, at the commencement of the litigation, has sufficient personal stake in the controversy to obtain judicial resolution of that controversy."

  2. DCCC v. Dunlap

    SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. CV-20-29 (Me. Super. Jun. 11, 2020)

    See Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511 (1975). See also Conservation Law Found. v. LePage, 2018 Me. Super. LEXIS 156, *16-17 (CUM-CV-18-45, July 20, 2018) (Horton, J.). Here, the Plaintiffs are the statutorily recognized national committees of the Democratic Party.