Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. v. Texas Medical Board
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24645
5th Cir.2010Background
- AAPS sued the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief for alleged constitutional violations by the Board.
- The district court dismissed for lack of standing, noting no Fifth Circuit authority directly on point.
- AAPS alleges anonymous complaints, conflicts of interest, arbitrary administrative rulings, privacy breaches, and retaliation against physicians.
- Plaintiffs claim violations include confrontation clause, due process, equal protection, free speech, and privacy statutes.
- The Board argued AAPS lacked associational standing to sue on behalf of its members.
- The Fifth Circuit must determine whether AAPS has associational standing to pursue its members’ complaints.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether AAPS has associational standing to sue on behalf of its members | AAPS satisfies Hunt prongs (1) and (2) | AAPS lacks third-prong prudential standing requiring member participation | Yes; AAPS has associational standing; case remanded for further proceedings. |
| Role of Hunt third prong in this context | Third prong satisfied by equitable relief and sample evidence from members | Third prong too restrictive given fact pattern | Satisfied; full analysis shows representative evidence suffices under Hunt. |
| Relation to other circuits on associational standing | Third-circuit approaches support standing by sampling from members | Some circuits reject associational standing depending on fact pattern | Fifth Circuit aligns closer to Hospital Council/Retired Chicago Police than Kansas Health Care Ass'n. |
| Impact of injunctive/declaratory relief on standing analysis | Relief sought is equitable; supports associational standing | Relief type does not cure need for member participation | Supports standing; not fatal to association’s claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (standing may be asserted by associations on behalf of members where injury to members and relief are implicated)
- Hunt v. Wash. St. Apple Adver. Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333 (1977) (three-prong test for associational standing (injury, germane to purpose, no need for all members))
- Brown v. Brown Grp., 517 U.S. 544 (1996) (pragmatic approach to associational standing; third prong is prudential)
- Hospital Council of Western Pa. v. City of Pittsburgh, 949 F.2d 83 (3d Cir. 1991) (sampling from members acceptable for associational standing)
- Retired Chicago Police Ass'n v. City of Chicago, 7 F.3d 584 (7th Cir. 1993) (representational standing with respected member participation for contract pattern claims)
- Kansas Health Care Ass'n v. Kansas Dept. of SRS, 958 F.2d 1018 (10th Cir. 1992) (fact-intensive ratemaking claims may defeat associational standing)
- Pa. Psychiatric Soc'y v. Green Spring Health Servs., Inc., 280 F.3d 278 (3d Cir. 2002) (association may prove standing via representative evidence)
- Cornerstone Christian Schs. v. Univ. Interscholastic League, 563 F.3d 127 (5th Cir. 2009) (illustrative limitations on associational standing for certain claims)