690 F.3d 1244
11th Cir.2012Background
- Five-foot Ten Commandments monument at Dixie County courthouse, privately donated in 2006; ACLU sues claiming Establishment Clause violation; standing contested on John Doe’s injury in fact; deposition and later affidavit conflict about injury causation; district court denied summary judgment on standing and then granted on merits; appellate court vacates summary judgment and remands for evidentiary standing hearing.
- Doe is a nonresident of Dixie County with a tentative interest in purchasing property there; his courthouse visit occurred January 2007 during which he observed the monument and continued with property records; he later claimed the monument deterred his property search and would have purchased if removed.
- The district court treated Doe’s affidavit as controlling for standing while Doe’s deposition suggested other factors deterred the purchase; the court did not resolve credibility, necessitating an evidentiary hearing per the appellate panel.
- Rule: standing requires injury in fact, causation, and redressability; evidence conflicts require live credibility determinations at hearing.
- Appellate court’s disposition: vacate district court’s merits judgment and remand for an evidentiary standing hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Doe has Article III standing based on injury in fact. | ACLU: Doe’s seeing monument caused concrete injury affecting property search. | County: Doe’s injury is too speculative and not tied to the monument alone. | No standing found; material factual conflicts require an evidentiary hearing. |
| Whether the district court properly weighed conflicting evidence (deposition vs affidavit) on standing. | Affidavit supports injury; deposition suggests other factors. | Credibility unresolved; live testimony needed. | District court erred by resolving credibility without an evidentiary hearing. |
| Whether remand for an evidentiary standing hearing is proper. | Standing dispute warrants further fact-finding. | If no injury shown, case should be dismissed. | Remand for evidentiary standing hearing is appropriate. |
| Whether the merits ruling can stand absent resolved standing. | Merits judgment should be open to review if standing unresolved. | Merits judgment cannot proceed without standing. | Merits judgment vacated; remand for standing determination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church & State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464 (1982) (standing requires concrete injury and proper jurisdictional power)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (injury in fact, causation, redressability)
- Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Adver. Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333 (1977) (organizational standing requires germane purpose and no individual participation)
- Glassroth v. Moore, 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2003) (offended parties’ injury shown by direct contact in professional duties)
- Rabun Cnty. Chamber of Commerce, Inc., 698 F.2d 1098 (11th Cir. 1983) (legal residents using state facilities; injury linkage to challenged conduct)
- Bischoff v. Osceola Cnty., Fla., 222 F.3d 874 (11th Cir. 2000) (credibility and standing; require live testimony when affidavits conflict with deposition)
- Tippens v. Celotex Corp., 805 F.2d 949 (11th Cir. 1986) (summary judgment may not resolve credibility conflicts where standing is at issue)
- Van T. Junkins & Assocs. v. U.S. Indus., Inc., 736 F.2d 656 (11th Cir. 1984) (affidavits contradicting deposition require careful handling; cannot create fact issues)
- Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009) (some-day injuries insufficient for standing)