Sonderegger v. E. F. Hutton & Co.

How later courts describe this case

• standing because plaintiffs alleged sectarian use of public property that impairs their use and enjoyment of property
• municipal taxpayers had standing to challenge city’s rental of space in a municipal airport to a religious organization for use as a chapel at less than market value
• plaintiffs had standing to challenge lease of space in municipal airport to chapel because they “regularly” used the airport and the presence of the chapel would impair that use
• § 301 preempts “issues which could have been resolved by grievance and arbitration”