Laroe Estates argues before Supreme Court in case involving Article III standing for intervenors
Clients Laroe Estates, Inc.
Jones Day represented Respondent Laroe Estates, Inc., before the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving when intervenors as of right must independently demonstrate Article III standing. This case arose when Laroe sought to intervene in a takings suit that Steven Sherman brought against Petitioner, the Town of Chester. In the Supreme Court, Petitioner argued that intervenors are always required to demonstrate Article III standing, while Laroe argued that intervenors need standing only if they raise new claims or seek different relief from that sought by an existing party. The Supreme Court remanded the case for the Second Circuit to apply Laroe's test and to determine whether Laroe in fact seeks the same relief as Sherman, the plaintiff in the underlying case. Significantly, the Court did not adopt Petitioner's rule, which would have created a sea change in multiparty litigation by requiring a constitutional inquiry into standing whenever any intervenor (or any new plaintiff) wished to join a case, regardless of the scope of that party's involvement.
Town of Chester v. Laroe Estates, Inc., No. 16-605 (U.S.)