Kathryn Collier v. SP Plus Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Per curiam
This case presents an unusual circumstance: both parties insist that the plaintiffs lack Article III standing to sue. They draw opposing conclusions from this premise, however. The plaintiffs say that without standing their case could not be removed from state court using 28 U.S.C. § 1441 ; the defendant justifies removal but says the case then required dismissal for lack of standing. The district court agreed with the defendant and dismissed the case. But the case was not removable, because the plaintiffs lack Article III standing-negating federal subject-matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, we…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Spokeo, Inc. v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Cathleen Silha v. ACT, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2015
- Kasalo v. Harris & Harris, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by149 opinions
- Christine Bryant v. Compass Group U.S.A., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
- Sonja Pennell v. Global Trust Management, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2021
- Michael Wood v. Security Credit Services, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2025
- Ayotte v. Boeing Co.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2018
- Duncan v. FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2019
144 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.