the order or judgment using a common-law writ of certiorari. In addition to this statutory requirement, persons seeking judicial review of a board of zoning appeals decision must have been parties to the proceeding before the board. Levy v. Board of Zoning App., No. M1999-00126-COA-R3-CV, 2001 WL 1141351, at *5 (Tenn.Ct.App. Sept.27, 2001) (No Tenn. R.App. P. 11 application filed). Both TenmCode Ann. § 13-7-206(b) and Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101 authorize persons who are “aggrieved” to appeal, first to the Board and then to the courts. Extending the authority to appeal and to seek judicial review to all persons who are “aggrieved” reflects an intention to ease the strict application of the customary standing principles. Federal Election Com’n v. Akins, 524 U.S. at 19, 118 S.Ct. at 1783 (<HOLDING>). It is desirable that land use matters be
holding that title viis term a person claiming to be aggrieved demonstrated congressional intent to confer standing to the fullest extent permitted by article iii holding that congress may dispense with prudential standing requirements holding that article iii constitutional standing must be addressed before considering lanham act prudential standing recognizing prudential concerns underlying antitrust standing restrictions holding that hfistory associates the word aggrieved with a congressional intent to cast the standing net broadly  beyond the commonlaw interests and substantive statutory rights upon which prudential standing traditionally rested