Lamb v. Forbes Media LLC
- Andrew Carter
- 1:22-cv-06319
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lamb v. Forbes Media LLC, Judge Carter ordered plaintiffs to respond to Forbes’s fact-based standing challenge by August 21, 2023.
Lamb and the other proposed class members, and Forbes Media LLC; the order specifically requires the plaintiffs to respond to Forbes’s standing challenge.
What happened
Lamb, individually and for others similarly situated, sued Forbes Media LLC. Forbes filed a motion challenging the court’s authority to hear the case, arguing that the complaint did not establish standing.
Forbes supported its challenge with evidence outside the complaint, including a declaration from David Johnson. The court explained that, in this type of challenge, plaintiffs may need to provide evidence disputing the defendant’s evidence or may rely on the complaint if the outside evidence does not contradict sufficient allegations.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. did not decide the standing issue or the pending motion to dismiss. He ordered plaintiffs to file evidence, such as an affidavit, by August 21, 2023, or file a letter saying they would rely only on the complaint’s allegations.
The detailed version
- Lamb v. Forbes Media LLC · No. 1:22-cv-06319
- Andrew Carter
- Aug. 10, 2023
Background
Lamb brought this case individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated against Forbes Media LLC. Forbes had a pending motion to dismiss. The opinion addresses only Forbes’s challenge under Rule 12(b)(1), which concerns subject-matter jurisdiction—the court’s legal authority to hear a case.
The jurisdiction challenge
Forbes made a fact-based Rule 12(b)(1) challenge to standing. Standing is the requirement that a plaintiff show a sufficient personal stake in the dispute. Unlike a challenge based only on the complaint, a fact-based challenge may rely on evidence outside the pleadings. Forbes relied on the declaration of David Johnson.
The court explained that, when a defendant’s outside evidence reveals factual disputes about jurisdiction, plaintiffs generally must provide evidence of their own to contest that evidence. Plaintiffs may instead rely on the complaint when the defendant’s evidence is immaterial because it does not contradict plausible allegations that already establish standing. If material evidence is disputed, the court may need to make factual findings to resolve standing.
Order
The court ordered plaintiffs to file evidence, such as an affidavit, contradicting Forbes’s outside evidence, or to file a letter stating that they wished to rely solely on the allegations in their complaint. The deadline was August 21, 2023. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. did not rule on whether plaintiffs had standing and did not decide Forbes’s pending motion to dismiss in this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.