Arbitrary And Capricious Regulation

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

• Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Polk
  568 So. 2d 35· Fla.· 1990-09-27 ·cited 62×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Department of Agriculture's destruction of nearly all citrus trees at Polk's nursery constituted a taking requiring just compensation, except for trees showing disease symptoms and those within 125 feet thereof. The court reversed the damag
• Earl C. Gibbs, Inc. v. Def. Supplies Corp.
  155 F.2d 525· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-05-08 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the affiliation provisions in Amendment No. 2, which created an irrebuttable presumption of control based on a loan exceeding five percent of monthly sales, were not arbitrary or capricious and were a valid condition for receiving a special subsidy.
• Merritt v. Peters
  65 So. 2d 861· Fla.· 1953-06-02 ·cited 47×
  Merritt challenges a county zoning regulation limiting commercial signs to 40 square feet as an unconstitutional exercise of police power. The Florida Supreme Court upholds the regulation, holding that aesthetic considerations constitute a valid basis for zoning restrictions affe
• Booth Fisheries Corp. v. Bowles
  153 F.2d 449· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-02-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Maximum Price Regulation 579 is arbitrary and capricious because it discriminates against the complainant's inland wholesale branches by prohibiting them from charging prices permitted to competing independent inland wholesalers.
• Medora v. Colautti
  602 F.2d 1149· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-24 ·cited 19×
  A state regulation barring aged, blind, or disabled individuals from general assistance if they are ineligible for federal SSI benefits, even if they meet state need criteria, violates the Equal Protection Clause.
• Armour & Co. v. Freeman
  304 F.2d 404· D.C. Cir.· 1962-02-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Secretary of Agriculture's regulation requiring genuine hams with added moisture to be labeled "Imitation Ham" was arbitrary and capricious on its face, forcing a violation of the Meat Inspection Act.
• State v. City of St. Petersburg
  133 Fla. 766· Fla.· 1938-08-01 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a city ordinance requiring general contractors to be licensed and examined before issuing building permits, rejecting constitutional challenges based on freedom of contract. The Court held that regulating the construction contracting business is a
• Zurla v. City OF Daytona Beach & City of Port Orange
  876 So. 2d 34· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-05-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for violation of due process rights and that the regulations were not arbitrary and capricious.
• Geo-Tech Reclamation Indus., Inc. v. Hamrick
  886 F.2d 662· 4th Cir.· 1989-09-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the "significantly adverse to the public sentiment" clause of West Virginia's Solid Waste Management Act bears no substantial or rational relationship to the state's interest in promoting the general public welfare and is therefore unconstitutional.
• Grumman Aerospace Corp. v. The United States
  579 F.2d 586· Ct. Cl.· 1978-06-14 ·cited 8×
  The court should not dismiss any part of the petition and should remand all parts of the claim to the NASA Board for determination of quantum.
• Int'l Union v. Dole
  919 F.2d 753· D.C. Cir.· 1990-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would remand regulations requiring proof of substantial or lasting deprivation of essential needs for waiver of overpayment, finding the requirement arbitrary and capricious.
• Bayuk Cigars, Inc. v. Porter
  154 F.2d 503· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a buyer has standing to protest a regulation that prevents them from paying more than the ceiling price for a commodity, even if they wish to pay more.
• Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Orange Cnty.
  780 So. 2d 198· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-02-02 ·cited 2×
  Costco challenged Orange County's ordinance requiring a 5,000-foot separation between package stores as an unconstitutional exercise of police power that lacked substantial relationship to public health, safety, or welfare. The court reversed the trial court's upholding of the or
• Faith Hosp. Ass'n v. The United States
  634 F.2d 526· Ct. Cl.· 1980-09-10 ·cited 2×
  The regulation is valid because the hospital, as the primary participant in a scheme to overcharge Medicare Part B patients, can have those overpayments deducted from its Medicare Part A reimbursement.
• Tanners Hides Inc. of Tex. v. Kendall
  219 F.2d 710· Emer. Ct. App.· 1955-03-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the provisions of Table II of Ceiling Price Regulation 2, Revision 1, requiring carload lots for 'selected' hide prices were invalid as applied to complainant's sales of less-than-carload lots to a tanner-manufacturer.
• Seminole Rock & Sand Co. v. Fleming
  160 F.2d 542· Emer. Ct. App.· 1947-03-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Administrator's use of an 'actual delivery' test to determine maximum prices under Maximum Price Regulation No. 188 was reasonable and not arbitrary or capricious, even if it caused hardship to an individual seller.
• White Trimming House, Inc. v. Porter
  154 F.2d 113· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-03-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Supplementary Order No. 108, which requires manufacturers of apparel components to sell at average prices no higher than their base period average, is a valid and reasonable regulation that effectuates the purposes of the price control act.
• Doctors Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. Heckler
  613 F. Supp. 1036· S.D. Fla.· 1985-07-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Provider Reimbursement Review Board (PRRB) has jurisdiction to review a hospital's base year cost determination under the Prospective Payment System (PPS) even without a Notice of Program Reimbursement (NPR), and that the case should be remanded for such r
• Scoville v. Town OF Miami Springs
  6 Fla. Supp. 94· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1954-02-19
  A gasoline service station operator challenged a Miami Springs ordinance restricting price signs to 12x12 inches and limiting their placement to dispensing equipment. The court held the ordinance unconstitutional as an arbitrary and unreasonable exercise of police power that viol