Procedural History
Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150 (1970) (Supreme Court of the United States)
The Supreme Court addressed whether associations of data processing service organizations had standing to challenge the validity of a federal regulation under the Administrative Procedure Act, highlighting issues of statutory interpretation and standing.
Source: Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150 (1970) (Supreme Court of the United States)
Action: Association of Data Processing Service Organizations (ADPSO) filed suit challenging regulatory actions of the Comptroller of the Currency.
Outcome: The district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing.
Significance: This ruling underscored the importance of demonstrating standing in administrative law cases.
Action: ADPSO appealed the district court's dismissal.
Outcome: The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal, asserting that the organization had standing.
Significance: The appellate ruling reinforced the notion that organizations could have a stake in legal challenges, expanding the understanding of organizational standing.
Action: The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' decision.
Outcome: The Supreme Court upheld the finding that ADPSO had standing to sue.
Significance: This landmark decision clarified the concept of standing in administrative law, setting a precedent for future cases regarding organizational plaintiffs.
When the Supreme Court heard the case, it was reviewing the decision made by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that overturned the District Court's dismissal of the complaint for lack of standing. The case was pivotal in determining the rights of organizations to challenge administrative regulations.
The Supreme Court applied the standard of review concerning statutory interpretation and standing under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals decision, establishing that the ADPSO had standing to challenge the federal regulation.