Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

case or controversy

Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court

Definitions from Case Law

From 347 U.S. 222 - International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Local 37 v. Boyd · 1954Most cited · 1,056 citing opinions

Determination of the scope and constitutionality of legislation in advance of its immediate adverse effect in the context of a concrete case involves too remote and abstract an inquiry for the proper exercise of the judicial function

How the Supreme Court has restated “case or controversy”

1933194019501954 most cited: 347 U.S. 222 - International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Local 37 v. Boyd (1954)
first stateddeparted

Each Supreme Court definition of “case or controversy,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.

How often courts cite the cases defining “case or controversy”

1930194019601980200020202030638

Court decisions citing the 5 opinions that defined “case or controversy” — 3,739 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.

All 5 definitions, chronological · 1933–1954

  1. ORIGINAL

    so long as the case retains the essentials of an adversary proceeding, involving a real, not a hypothetical, controversy, which is finally determined by the judgment below

  2. 1943·319 U.S. 359 - Altvater v. Freeman[p5]· cited 557×

    the requirements of case or controversy are met where payment of a claim is demanded as of right and where payment is made, but where the involuntary or coercive nature of the exaction preserves the right to recover the sums paid or to challenge the legality of the claim

  3. The moral stigma of a judgment which no longer affects legal rights does not present a case or controversy for appellate review.

    mootness — moral stigma exception

  4. The conflicting contentions of the parties in this case as to the validity of the state statute present a real, substantial controversy between parties having adverse legal interests, a dispute definite and concrete, not hypothetical or abstract. Legal rights asserted by appellant are threatened with imminent invasion by appellees and will be directly affected to a specific and substantial degree by decision of the questions of law.