Opinion ID: 6343329
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Harm to Van Cleve’s Interests as an Attorney

Text: A plaintiff who invokes the jurisdiction of a federal court bears the burden to show the Constitutional limitations on standing: (1) an injury in fact, (2) a causal connection between the injury and the causal conduct, and (3) a likelihood the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision. Tanner Adver. Grp., LLC v. Fayette Cnty., 451 F.3d 777, 791 (11th Cir. 2006) (en banc). At the pleading stage of a case, general factual allegations of injury can suffice, but these general factual allegations must plausibly and clearly allege an injury in fact. Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc., 979 F.3d 917, 924 (11th Cir. 2020) (en banc). “Mere conclusory statements do not suffice.” Id. (quotation marks and alteration omitted). “An injury in fact consists of an invasion of a legally protected interest that is both concrete and particularized and actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.” Trichell v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc., 964 F.3d 990, 996 (11th Cir. 2020) (quotation marks omitted). “A concrete injury must be de facto; that is, it must actually exist.” Salcedo v. Hanna, 936 F.3d 1162, 1167 (11th 2 “We review standing determinations de novo.” Tanner Adver. Grp., L.L.C. v. Fayette Cnty., 451 F.3d 777, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (en banc). USCA11 Case: 21-13699 Date Filed: 05/24/2022 Page: 4 of 11