Arbitrary And Capricious Agency Action

543 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 562 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Armour & Co. v. Reconstr. Fin. Corp.
  162 F.2d 918· Emer. Ct. App.· 1947-06-30 ·cited 38×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the regulation authorizing the withholding of subsidy payments for violations of price regulations was valid and did not violate due process, as the protest procedure provided an adequate opportunity for a hearing.
• Fla. Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. & Bob Crawford v. City OF Pompano Beach
  792 So. 2d 539· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-07-11 ·cited 37×
  The Florida Department of Agriculture appeals a circuit court injunction preventing destruction of healthy citrus trees within 1900 feet of infected trees under the state's citrus canker eradication program. The appellate court reverses, holding that property owners must exhaust
• Caci v. The United States
  719 F.2d 1567· Fed. Cir.· 1983-10-28 ·cited 37×
  The court held that an unsuccessful bidder has standing to challenge a government contract award based on a breach of the implied contract to consider bids fairly, and that the Claims Court erred in enjoining the award based on an appearance of impropriety without sufficient evid
• S. Cal. Edison Co. & Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  770 F.2d 779· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-03 ·cited 36×·via Judicial Review Of Agency Action (Arbitrary And Capricious Standard)
  The court held that FERC's promulgation of procedural rules for BPA rate approval did not require notice and comment under the APA, but that the agency failed to apply required Federal Power Act procedures regarding ex parte communications and case-in-chief filing for nonregional
• Saavedra v. Donovan
  700 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1983-02-04 ·cited 36×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor's decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law, and was supported by substantial evidence, affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment.
• Couf v. Karleen DeBLAKER
  652 F.2d 585· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-07 ·cited 36×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a federal cause of action based on the city's zoning decisions, as the state court's finding of procedural error did not equate to a finding of arbitrary or irrational zoning under federal law, and there was insufficient evid
• Masino v. The United States
  589 F.2d 1048· Ct. Cl.· 1978-12-13 ·cited 36×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the plaintiff's termination was not arbitrary or capricious, finding no material procedural irregularities and a sufficient nexus between his misconduct and the efficiency of the service.
• Matlovich v. Secretary OF The AIR Force and Colonel Alton J. Thogersen
  591 F.2d 852· D.C. Cir.· 1978-12-06 ·cited 36×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Air Force failed to provide a reasoned explanation for denying an exception to its policy of discharging homosexual service members, making judicial review impossible.
• Tracy v. Gleason
  379 F.2d 469· D.C. Cir.· 1967-05-25 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Administrator's termination of previously awarded pension benefits is not a "claim" under 38 U.S.C. § 211(a), and therefore is subject to judicial review.
• Armour & Co. of Del. v. Brown
  137 F.2d 233· Emer. Ct. App.· 1943-08-06 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Administrator's denial of Armour's application for price adjustment was arbitrary and capricious, as Armour demonstrated it would suffer a substantial loss under the established maximum prices for government contracts.
• Sierra Club v. The United States Dep't OF Transp.
  753 F.2d 120· D.C. Cir.· 1985-01-25 ·cited 35×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the FAA did not violate NEPA by failing to prepare a new EIS and did not violate the Transportation Code by permitting B-737 operations at Jackson Hole Airport.
• Garza v. Miller
  688 F.2d 480· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-10 ·cited 35×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the increased security measures at Marion penitentiary, including restrictions on jobs, recreation, and education, did not violate the inmate's due process or equal protection rights, nor did they violate statutory rights to prison employment.
• Cook v. Whiteside
  505 F.2d 32· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 35×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the inmate's pro se complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
• Great S. Trucking Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  139 F.2d 984· 4th Cir.· 1944-01-10 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the Board should have considered the company's petition to redetermine the bargaining representative, as the company acted in good faith seeking guidance and the Board's refusal to consider the petition was arbitrary.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nixon Gear, Inc.
  649 F.2d 906· 2d Cir.· 1981-05-26 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by failing to order an evidentiary hearing on the Company's objections to the Union's alleged misrepresentations and improper inducements, and therefore denied enforcement of the Board's order.
• Commonwealth OF Mass. v. Andrus
  594 F.2d 872· 1st Cir.· 1979-02-20 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the enactment of the 1978 amendments to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act rendered the appeal from the preliminary injunction moot, as the amendments addressed the deficiencies that formed the basis of the injunction.
• Env't Def. Fund, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency & Russell E. Train
  510 F.2d 1292· D.C. Cir.· 1975-04-04 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the EPA's order suspending the registration of aldrin and dieldrin was a rational exercise of discretion, supported by substantial evidence, and not arbitrary agency action.
• Madison Park Corp. v. Bowles
  140 F.2d 316· Emer. Ct. App.· 1943-12-27 ·cited 34×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Price Administrator lawfully established maximum rents based on April 1, 1941, prices, even if it prevented 'normal' rent increases, as the Emergency Price Control Act aimed to prevent inflation.
• Friends OF the Everglades, Inc. v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Monroe Cnty.
  456 So. 2d 904· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-07-25 ·cited 33×
  Friends of the Everglades and Upper Keys Citizens Association sought to appeal a Monroe County development order for Port Bougainville to the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission (FLWAC) and to compel the Department of Community Affairs to enforce environmental laws. Th
• Lukas E. Hoska, III v. United States Dep't OF THE Army
  677 F.2d 131· D.C. Cir.· 1982-04-30 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision affirming the revocation of petitioner's security clearance was not supported by substantial evidence.
• Zeigler v. Jackson
  638 F.2d 776· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-02 ·cited 33×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Commission's termination of Zeigler violated his right to equal protection because similarly situated individuals with similar or more serious convictions were retained, and the Commission failed to provide a rational justification for the differential tre
• Miami Newspaper Printing Pressmen's Union Local 46 v. McCULLOCH
  322 F.2d 993· D.C. Cir.· 1963-07-18 ·cited 33×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Board's failure to certify the results of a properly conducted election, due to procedural doubts, was an arbitrary and capricious act exceeding its powers, giving the district court jurisdiction.
• Union OF Concerned Scientists v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & the United States
  735 F.2d 1437· D.C. Cir.· 1984-05-25 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) rulemaking, which treats the results of emergency preparedness exercises as distinct from the Section 189(a) hearing requirement for operating licenses, is consistent with the Atomic Energy Act.
• Foust v. Int'l Bhd. OF Elec. Workers
  572 F.2d 710· 10th Cir.· 1978-03-06 ·cited 32×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the jury instructions on the duty of fair representation were proper and that there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict, but remanded for reconsideration of the punitive damages award.
• Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Driver
  433 F.2d 1137· D.C. Cir.· 1970-05-19 ·cited 32×
  A disappointed bidder has standing to challenge an agency's arbitrary or capricious action in denying a government contract, and such challenges can be resolved through summary judgment if no genuine issues of material fact exist.
• Overseas Media Corp. v. McNAMARA
  385 F.2d 308· D.C. Cir.· 1967-10-03 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Secretary of Defense's denial of access to military newsstands for a newspaper publisher raises justiciable issues and is not wholly insulated from judicial review.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. W. REX Co.
  243 F.2d 356· 3d Cir.· 1957-04-10 ·cited 32×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that a company cannot refuse to bargain with a certified union based on changes occurring shortly after certification, especially when the company agreed to the Regional Director's final decision on election matters.
• City OF W. Palm Beach v. State
  158 Fla. 863· Fla.· 1947-05-06 ·cited 32×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The City of West Palm Beach appealed a mandamus order compelling it to issue a building permit that it had denied. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the mandamus judgment, holding that the ordinance provision requiring new buildings to "substantially equal" adjacent buildings in
• Am. Fed'n of Labor & Cong. of Indus. Orgs. v. Donovan
  757 F.2d 330· D.C. Cir.· 1985-03-22 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Department of Labor violated the Administrative Procedure Act's notice and comment requirements when it adopted a regulation defining 'in the United States' based on a 'significant or substantial' standard without adequate notice. However, the court affirm
• McGHEE v. Draper
  564 F.2d 902· 10th Cir.· 1977-10-03 ·cited 31×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict against the plaintiff on her liberty interest claim, as the evidence could support a finding that the school board's actions imposed a stigma foreclosing future employment opportunities. The court also found that pr
• State v. Stein
  133 Fla. 530· Fla.· 1938-07-20 ·cited 31×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the State Racing Commission's authority to adopt Rule 34(a), which prohibited horse racing except between noon and 7 P.M., even though this prevented a permittee from conducting night racing. The court held that the Commission's rulemaking power t
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Dep't OF Transp.
  680 F.2d 206· D.C. Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the agency's rescission of a safety standard was arbitrary and illogical, lacking reasoned decisionmaking.
• Couch Constr. Co., Inc. v. Dep't OF Transp.
  361 So. 2d 172· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-06-16 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  Couch Construction challenges the Florida Department of Transportation's rejection of all bids (including Couch's apparent low bid) for an Interstate 10 paving contract in Gadsden County. The court reverses and remands, holding that while agencies have discretion to reject bids,
• Warner S. Kelly and Samuel S. Parras v. Lou V. Brewer
  525 F.2d 394· 8th Cir.· 1975-11-19 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  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.
• Scheelhaase v. Woodbury Cent. Cmty. Sch. Dist.
  488 F.2d 237· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-28 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the school board's decision to terminate a teacher's contract, even if based on an erroneous interpretation of student test scores, was not arbitrary and capricious and thus did not violate substantive due process.
• Cont'l Bus. Enters., Inc. v. The United States
  452 F.2d 1016· Ct. Cl.· 1971-12-10 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that a bidder alleging arbitrary and capricious government action in the procurement process is entitled to a trial, even if the government agency has broad discretion, especially when there are disputed facts regarding the necessity of negotiation and the basis fo
• Daub v. United States
  292 F.2d 895· Ct. Cl.· 1961-07-19 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Army's arbitrary and capricious application of its own regulations, resulting in a disproportionate penalty for the plaintiff's first offense, entitled him to back pay and recovery.
• Wilton E. Hall & Greenville Television Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  237 F.2d 567· D.C. Cir.· 1956-09-06 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Commission erred in rejecting propagation curves as evidence and in finding no misrepresentation by the intervenor.
• Bowman v. Bowles
  140 F.2d 974· Emer. Ct. App.· 1944-02-24 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Administrator's refusal to consent to the complainants' election to register under the Hotel Regulation was not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law, as the building's rental practices on the maximum rent date and thereafter were more aligned with the
• Hillcrest Terrace Corp. v. Brown
  137 F.2d 663· Emer. Ct. App.· 1943-07-27 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Administrator acted arbitrarily in denying a protest for rent adjustment when the initial rent was based on a temporary tax exemption that expired, as this situation was not a product of normal market conditions.
• Ananeh-Firempong v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  766 F.2d 621· 1st Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 29×
  The court's holding is not explicitly stated as this is a concurring and dissenting opinion focusing on legal principles.
• Philadelphia Citizens IN Action by Roxanne Jones v. Schweiker
  669 F.2d 877· 3d Cir.· 1982-01-15 ·cited 29×·via Judicial Review Of Agency Action (Arbitrary And Capricious Standard)
  The court held that the federal defendant had good cause under the APA to dispense with notice and comment procedures when promulgating regulations for the AFDC program.
• Jimenez v. Barber
  252 F.2d 550· 9th Cir.· 1958-01-30 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the appeal presented no substantial question and dismissed the appeal as frivolous, denying the motion for a temporary restraining order.
• Nat'l Fed'n OF Fed. Emps. v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  818 F.2d 935· D.C. Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 28×
  The court held that federal district courts have subject matter jurisdiction to hear challenges to mandatory drug testing programs for federal employees, and that prospective injunctive relief is not barred by the availability of a damages remedy.
• Grove Isle, Ltd. v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Env't Reg.
  454 So. 2d 571· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-03-22 ·cited 28×
  Grove Isle challenges two Department of Environmental Regulation rules governing permit issuance for activities in Outstanding Florida Waters, particularly Biscayne Bay. The court upheld Rule 17-3.041 but invalidated Rule 17-4.242 to the extent it imposes an undefined 'public int
• Alschuler v. Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  686 F.2d 472· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that neighborhood residents have standing to challenge HUD's approval of a low-income housing project based on concerns about racial and economic concentration, but not for claims solely benefiting project inhabitants.
• Quinn v. Burlington N. Inc. Pension Plan
  664 F.2d 675· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-30 ·cited 28×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the Burlington Northern Pension Plan Administrator could offset pension benefits even after the employee elected to receive a salary in lieu of pension benefits from another plan, as the employee remained entitled to vested pension benefits.
• Ellis v. The United States
  610 F.2d 760· Ct. Cl.· 1979-12-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the plaintiff, LeRoy Ellis, was a "firefighter" for the purposes of special annuity rights under 5 U.S.C. § 8336(c), and that the Civil Service Commission's denial of his retirement annuity was arbitrary and capricious.
• Ashton v. Civiletti
  613 F.2d 923· D.C. Cir.· 1979-10-04 ·cited 28×
  The FBI's communications to an employee created a property interest in his job, entitling him to due process protections before termination, and the district court erred in granting summary judgment.
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  507 F.2d 905· 9th Cir.· 1974-11-11 ·cited 28×·via Administrative Procedure Act (Apa) Arbitrary And Capricious Standard
  The court held that Arizona's statutory scheme allowing "conditional permits" (variances) for pollution sources is permissible under the Clean Air Act, provided the EPA ultimately approves each variance and it does not endanger public health or safety. The court also found that t