This case arises against the backdrop of the national housing crisis. Nationwide, foreclosures are increasing, construction and purchase of new homes is decreasing, and home values are plummeting. In some ways, the facts presented here echo national trends, but the court decide a fairly narrow question: whether individuals who purchased homes in new developments have standing to sue the developers for injuries allegedly caused by the developers’ practice of marketing neighboring homes to individuals who presented a high risk of foreclosure and abandonment of their homes, financing those high-risk buyers, concealing that information, and misrepresenting the character of the neighborhoods. The district court held that plaintiffs did not have standing because none of the alleged injuries amounted to a concrete, non-conjectural injury-in-fact, and that there was no sufficiently strong causal connection between any injury and defendants’ conduct. It also denied plaintiffs leave to amend their complaints. The Appellate Court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.