Abuse Of Administrative Discretion

48 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• State v. Rose
  122 Fla. 227· Fla.· 1935-12-13 ·cited 68×
  West Flagler Amusement Co. sought a writ of mandamus to compel the State Racing Commission to rescind its October 22, 1935 order allocating dog racing dates in Dade County, alleging the Commission unlawfully discriminated against it by granting fewer racing days than competing tr
• Scarpa v. U. S. Bd. OF Parole
  477 F.2d 278· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-02 ·cited 62×
• Allison v. Block
  723 F.2d 631· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-28 ·cited 50×
  The court held that 7 U.S.C. § 1981a requires the Secretary of Agriculture to provide notice of deferral availability and establish uniform procedures and substantive standards for processing loan deferral requests, rather than exercising unfettered discretion.
• Boyce v. The United States
  543 F.2d 1290· Ct. Cl.· 1976-10-20 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Civil Service Commission's decision was arbitrary and capricious because it relied on an improper rationale, even if other proper reasons might have existed.
• Kulkin v. Bergland
  626 F.2d 181· 1st Cir.· 1980-07-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court properly granted summary judgment, affirming the store's disqualification and the agency's decision not to apply the newer money penalty provision retroactively.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gibson Prods. Co. OF Wash. Parish
  494 F.2d 762· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-31 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by issuing a bargaining order without adequate findings that traditional remedies could not ensure a fair election, particularly when the case was reclassified to avoid controlling precedent.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Davis Cafeteria, Inc.
  396 F.2d 18· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by finding two of eight cafeterias an appropriate bargaining unit, as the local managers lacked substantive autonomy over collective bargaining subjects.
• Fla. Real Est. Comm'n v. D. L. and Doris Rogers
  176 So. 2d 65· Fla.· 1965-04-07 ·cited 34×
  District courts have the power to review and modify penalties imposed by the Florida Real Estate Commission in certiorari proceedings, including reducing a revocation to a suspension where appropriate on the record, as this authority is expressly vested by the Administrative Proc
• Ahwazi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  751 F.2d 1120· 9th Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 32×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) abused its discretion by failing to consider the factual basis of petitioners' motions to reopen deportation proceedings before weighing the ultimate equities of their cases.
• Atl. Seaboard Corp. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  201 F.2d 568· 4th Cir.· 1953-01-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission abused its discretion by assigning a later filing date to petitioners' rate schedules, causing them irreparable harm.
• Warner S. Kelly and Samuel S. Parras v. Lou V. Brewer
  525 F.2d 394· 8th Cir.· 1975-11-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that while administrative segregation is permissible, prolonged confinement requires meaningful periodic review by prison administrators, and the district court erred in imposing a specific plan that removed discretion from the Warden.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pinkerton's, Inc.
  428 F.2d 479· 6th Cir.· 1970-06-04 ·cited 30×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the Regional Director's factual conclusions supported the Board's approval of the proposed bargaining unit and that the employer's conduct impaired election conditions, warranting a new election.
• Samala v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  336 F.2d 7· 5th Cir.· 1964-08-26 ·cited 28×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the deportation order or the denial of the waiver application because the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies and the waiver denial occurred prior to deportation proceedings.
• United States ex rel. Hull v. Stalter
  151 F.2d 633· 7th Cir.· 1945-11-06 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the Selective Service Board abused its discretion by refusing to classify the relator as a minister of religion, as subsequent proof conclusively demonstrated his entitlement to such classification.
• Boston Edison Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  557 F.2d 845· D.C. Cir.· 1977-05-17 ·cited 24×
  The Commission lacked the authority to reject a rate filing that was submitted pursuant to then-effective regulations, based on a new standard announced after the filing but before rejection.
• Milutin Obrenovic v. Alva L. Pilliod
  282 F.2d 874· 7th Cir.· 1960-10-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the delegation of discretionary power to the Attorney General to withhold deportation under Section 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act is constitutional and that the agency's denial of the plaintiff's application was not an abuse of discretion.
• Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. Division OF Pari-Mutuel Wagering
  253 So. 2d 429· Fla.· 1971-10-15 ·cited 18×
  Gulfstream Park Racing Association challenged the Department of Business Regulation's allocation of premium winter horse racing dates to rival Hialeah Race Course instead of to Gulfstream. The Florida Supreme Court found the Department abused its discretion by failing to remedy t
• Diehl v. Louie L. Wainwright
  419 F.2d 1309· 5th Cir.· 1970-01-05 ·cited 17×
  The First Amendment does not grant prisoners an unlimited right to take correspondence courses; prison officials' decisions are administrative discretion.
• Golden Holiday Tours v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  531 F.2d 624· D.C. Cir.· 1976-03-03 ·cited 16×
  The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) abused its discretion by rejecting an amendment to an inclusive tour prospectus, as the rejection was arbitrary, disproportionate to the alleged violation, and failed to serve the rule's purpose of protecting travellers.
• Chipola Nurseries, Inc. v. Division of Administration
  294 So. 2d 357· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-03-28 ·cited 16×
  Chipola Nurseries and other landowners challenged an eminent domain taking of their properties for a three-mile segment of Interstate 10, arguing the Department of Transportation selected the route in bad faith and without proper study of alternatives. The court affirmed the tria
• August M. Carmazi and Lester M. Muhn v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Dade Cnty.
  108 So. 2d 318· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-01-06 ·cited 16×
  Riparian property owners challenged a proposed dam on the Little River that would block their boat navigation to Biscayne Bay. The court held that the right to navigate beyond one's property is a public right, not a private property right protected by eminent domain, and that the
• United States ex rel. Pirinsky v. Shaughnessy
  177 F.2d 708· 2d Cir.· 1949-09-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the denial of bail and the setting of excessively high bail constituted an abuse of administrative discretion.
• United Parcel Serv. OF Ohio, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n & Ray Marshall
  570 F.2d 806· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the safety standard was valid, the Commission's order requiring all employees to wear steel-toed safety shoes was overbroad and an abuse of discretion given the specific circumstances.
• United States ex rel. Knauff v. McGrath
  181 F.2d 839· 2d Cir.· 1950-03-28 ·cited 14×
  The court reversed the denial of a petition for habeas corpus, ordering that a writ issue to allow the respondents an opportunity to file a return.
• Ariz. Elec. Power Coop., Inc. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  816 F.2d 1366· 9th Cir.· 1987-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) abused its discretion by failing to abide by prior representations to the court, disregarding its own precedent without adequate explanation, and misinterpreting applicable statutes regarding the review of rail rate inc
• Haviv Schieber v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  347 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1965-06-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that there was no abuse of administrative discretion in denying the petitioner's application to withhold deportation.
• Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  904 F.2d 1156· 7th Cir.· 1990-06-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board did not abuse its discretion in issuing a bargaining order despite the passage of time and employee turnover.
• Jack Thompson Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  684 F.2d 458· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Board abused its discretion by failing to consider the collective bargaining agreement's impact on the employer's commission enforcement policy and by not determining if the turnover rule was a valid precondition to commission. The court also found the con
• Oteiza v. Braxton
  547 So. 2d 948· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-06-20 ·cited 6×
  A physician sued his attorney for legal malpractice after the attorney failed to timely file a petition for review in a medical board disciplinary case, causing the appeal to be dismissed. The court reversed summary judgment for the defendant attorney, holding that the physician
• Nevins v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  796 F.2d 14· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-23 ·cited 6×
  The NLRB abused its discretion by deferring to an arbitrator's decision when the issues and facts concerning the constructive discharge claim were not parallel to those presented in arbitration.
• WAX v. Horne
  844 So. 2d 797· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-05-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the permanent revocation of the educator's certificate was within the statutory authority of the agency and not inconsistent with prior agency practice.
• United States v. Gen. Dynamics Corp.
  828 F.2d 1356· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-02 ·cited 4×
  The district court exceeded its jurisdiction by staying a criminal prosecution pending action by the ASBCA, as the primary jurisdiction doctrine does not apply to the ASBCA in this context.
• Stewart Cap. Corp. v. Andrus
  701 F.2d 846· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Interior Board of Land Appeals abused its discretion by applying its interpretation of 43 C.F.R. § 3102.6-1(a)(2) retroactively to lease offers submitted under prior BLM practice.
• Eldon H. Dahl and Jeanette M. Dahl v. The United States
  695 F.2d 1373· Fed. Cir.· 1982-12-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the FmHA was justified in refusing to disburse loan funds and terminating the loan due to the plaintiffs' default and changed circumstances, and therefore, the plaintiffs have no claim for damages.
• Eliason Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  688 F.2d 22· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Board abused its discretion by adopting the Regional Director's report without reviewing the underlying evidence, and that Eliason's contentions raised sufficient questions to warrant a hearing.
• State OF La. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  476 F.2d 140· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission has jurisdiction to order curtailment plans affecting direct sale customers and that its chosen method of pipeline-by-pipeline consideration is not an abuse of discretion. It also adopted the reasoning from a prior case regarding t
• O'Leary v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  424 F.2d 908· D.C. Cir.· 1970-01-30 ·cited 4×
  The Securities and Exchange Commission did not abuse its discretion or exceed its authority by barring petitioners from association with any broker or dealer in securities, even though a hearing examiner recommended lesser sanctions.
• Hegerich v. del Guercio
  255 F.2d 701· 9th Cir.· 1958-05-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the denial of voluntary departure was an abuse of administrative discretion, despite the alien's deportability.
• Int'l Truck & Engine Corp. v. Cap. Truck, Inc.
  872 So. 2d 372· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-04-28 ·cited 2×
  ITEC and Ward sought review of a DHSMV order abating administrative proceedings regarding a motor vehicle dealership license for Ward. The court held that the agency's abatement was arbitrary and without legal basis, as it effectively granted an unauthorized stay despite a final
• Ga. Dep't OF Human Res. v. Nash
  915 F.2d 1482· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-30 ·cited 2×
  The dissent argues the majority erred in failing to recognize a cause of action for compensatory damages against the state agency for its failure to advocate for a blind vendor, and in misinterpreting the Secretary of Education's enforcement authority under the Randolph-Sheppard
• Diamond v. The United States
  657 F.2d 1194· Ct. Cl.· 1981-08-19 ·cited 2×
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendant, finding no abuse of discretion or implied-in-fact contract, and thus no jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' claim for damages.
• City OF Umatilla v. W. Cent. Fla. Police Benevolent Ass'n
  360 So. 2d 1105· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-06-21 ·cited 2×
  The City of Umatilla challenged the Public Employees Relations Commission's dismissal of its objections to a union representation election as untimely. The court held that PERC abused its discretion by strictly applying a five-day filing deadline without considering unusual circu
• S. Ass'n of Bell Tel. Emps. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  129 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1942-06-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to disestablish an employee association was not supported by evidence and constituted an abuse of discretion, as the employees had freely chosen the association as their representative.
• Chappell Schs., LLC v. Dep't of Child. & Families
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-12-22
  The appellate court reversed an administrative agency's decision to fine a childcare facility and revoke its designation. The court found the agency abused its discretion by rejecting the administrative law judge's factual findings, which were supported by substantial evidence.
• Huston v. Ladner
  973 F.2d 1564· Fed. Cir.· 1992-09-01
  The court held that the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences did not abuse its discretion in refusing to consider additional evidence submitted by Huston because he failed to show good cause for not presenting it earlier. Ignorance of the rules or attorney negligence does no
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Aces Mech. Corp.
  837 F.2d 570· 2d Cir.· 1988-01-22
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by refusing to defer to a prior arbitral decision, as the arbitral panel had considered the facts relevant to the subsequent unfair labor practice charge.
• Knoefler v. Schneider
  565 F.2d 1072· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-28
  The court held that the Knoeflers' suit for injunctive relief and damages was properly dismissed because 26 U.S.C. § 7421 bars injunctions against tax collection unless specific conditions are met, which were not satisfied here.