Legal Opinion
Braunstein v. Arizona Department of Transportation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 27, 2012No. 10-16564, 10-17193PublishedCited by 62 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge:
Plaintiff Paul Braunstein seeks damages based on Arizona’s use of an affirmative action program in its award of a 2005 transportation engineering contract. We affirm the district court’s holding that Braunstein lacks Article III standing.
I. Background
Braunstein owns and operates Base-Plans, a small engineering and land surveying firm in Arizona that previously performed work for the Arizona Department of Transportation (“the Department”). The Department is a state agency responsible for the planning, design, repair, and construction of roads in Arizona.…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- Scott Nordstrom v. Charles RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Associated General Contractors of America, San Diego Chapter, Inc. v. California Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Cotton ex rel. McClure v. City of EurekaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2012
- Cra v. City of BerkeleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2023
- Calop Business Systems, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2013
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.