Fraternal Order of Police, Miami Lodge No. 20 v. City of Miami, 16-1849

In 1994 the City of Miami administered a promotional exam for police sergeant; the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) challenged the oral portion as unlawful and sued in 1996 seeking declaratory, injunctive relief and damages.
The trial court bifurcated liability and damages; after a bench trial it entered a partial final declaratory judgment in 2007 invalidating the oral exam.
The City moved for clarification whether the FOP has associational standing to recover monetary damages on behalf of individual members; the trial court ruled in 2008 the FOP lacks such standing because damages determination would require individualized participation and discovery from members.
The FOP’s later motion for reconsideration was ultimately denied, and the FOP appealed the standing ruling.
The core factual complication: FOP members were differently situated (some later promoted, some not promoted, some never would have been promoted), so damages would be fact-dependent and individualized.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a union (FOP) has associational standing to pursue monetary damages for its members when individual proof is required	FOP argued it may represent members and recover damages on their behalf	City argued associational standing does not extend to individualized damages claims requiring member participation	Court held FOP lacks associational standing to seek damages because calculating relief requires individualized participation and proof from members

Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333 (association may sue for members if (1) members could sue, (2) issues germane, (3) individual participation not required)
Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (relief that automatically benefits injured members supports associational standing; individualized injuries defeat it)
Int’l Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers v. Brock, 477 U.S. 274 (union lacked representational standing for damages that require individualized proof)
United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Grp., Inc., 517 U.S. 544 (associational standing precluded for damages unless Congress authorizes otherwise; third Hunt prong prudential)
Fla. Home Builders Ass’n v. Dep’t of Labor & Emp’t Sec., 412 So. 2d 351 (Fla. modified associational standing: substantial affected membership, germane subject, relief appropriate for association; rule challenges do not include money damages)
Citibank, N.A. v. Olsak, 208 So. 3d 227 (standing review standard: legal issues de novo; factual findings for standing reviewed for competent, substantial evidence)
Kumar Corp. v. Nopal Lines, Ltd., 462 So. 2d 1178 (real party in interest principle and purpose of protecting defendants and res judicata)