Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review

3,214 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 87 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States
  571 F. Supp. 2d 1280· S.D. Fla.· 2008-08-08 ·cited 14×
  The court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, as the DOT's determination that the Tamiami Trail Modification Project was an environmental restoration project, not a transportat
• Crume v. Metro. Life Ins.
  417 F. Supp. 2d 1258· M.D. Fla.· 2006-02-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that MetLife's denial of disability benefits was not arbitrary and capricious, as the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient objective medical evidence of a disabling psychiatric impairment precluding her from her own occupation.
• Indep. Ins. Agents OF Am., Inc. v. Clarke
  955 F.2d 731· D.C. Cir.· 1992-02-07 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's decision without reaching the question of the statute's validity, arguing the majority improperly raised and decided an issue not presented by the parties.
• Good Samaritan Hosp. v. Sullivan
  952 F.2d 1017· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Secretary's cost limit regulations were not arbitrary or capricious, and that clause (ii) of the Medicare Act does not permit retroactive rulemaking or across-the-board adjustments for cost years prior to 1986.
• Heriberto Morales v. Yeutter
  952 F.2d 954· 7th Cir.· 1991-12-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Department of Agriculture's regulation excluding sod from the Seasonal Agricultural Worker (SAW) amnesty program was not arbitrary and capricious, and therefore valid.
• Nazay v. Miller
  949 F.2d 1323· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an employer's inclusion of a penalty provision in an employee benefit plan is a design decision, not a fiduciary act, and thus not subject to the arbitrary and capricious standard of review under ERISA. The court reversed the district court's judgment.
• Darel Taylor and Margaret Taylor Darel Taylor v. The Cont'l Grp. Change IN Control Severance PAY Plan
  933 F.2d 1227· 3d Cir.· 1991-05-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the term "successor" in the severance plan is ambiguous, creating genuine issues of material fact regarding its interpretation.
• Anny Newman v. Burgin
  930 F.2d 955· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the University provided Professor Newman with sufficient due process, and therefore affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment on her federal claims.
• Castillo-Rodriguez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  929 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 14×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals' final order, even if the petition for review technically designates the immigration judge's order, and that substantial evidence supported the Board's denial of asylum.
• Miller v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
  925 F.2d 979· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to amend or in granting summary judgment, as the insurer acted reasonably and not arbitrarily and capriciously in terminating benefits.
• Am. Petroleum Inst. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  906 F.2d 729· D.C. Cir.· 1990-06-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) precludes considering land treatment as a Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT) and that EPA adequately justified abandoning comparative risk analysis. However, the court found EPA unlawfully exempted K
• Behm Fam. Corp. v. U.S. Dep't OF Energy
  903 F.2d 830· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Department of Energy's (DOE) decision to use Platt's Oil Price Handbook for determining competitive disadvantage was not arbitrary and capricious, and thus affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment.
• Abdulla Fouad & Sons v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  898 F.2d 482· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the FDIC's denial of additional insurance coverage was reasonable because it was based on the deposit account records of the failed institution, as permitted by FDIC regulations.
• Lou Gallegos v. Lyng
  891 F.2d 788· 10th Cir.· 1989-12-15 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's ruling that the food stamp mail loss regulation was not arbitrary and capricious but reversed the ruling prohibiting the federal government from charging interest on New Mexico's debt.
• Aluminum Co. OF Am. v. Bonneville Power Administration
  891 F.2d 748· 9th Cir.· 1989-12-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while FERC erred in holding an evidentiary hearing to supplement the administrative record, its ultimate approval of the nonfirm energy rates was reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.
• Wilkins v. Sullivan
  889 F.2d 135· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Secretary of Health and Human Services acted within his authority in issuing HCFA Ruling 80-2, which excluded bilateral carotid body resection surgery from Medicare coverage as not reasonable and necessary.
• Or. Natural Res. Council v. Lyng
  882 F.2d 1417· 9th Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 14×
• Syracuse Peace Council v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & the United States
  867 F.2d 654· D.C. Cir.· 1989-02-10 ·cited 14×
  The FCC's decision to eliminate the first prong of the fairness doctrine was not supported by the record and was not adopted in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Hoover v. Blue Cross AND Blue Shield OF Alabama
  855 F.2d 1538· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendants' interpretation of the co-payment provision was reasonable and entitled them to summary judgment, and that the district court did not err in denying leave to amend the complaint.
• Voliva v. Seafarers Pension Plan
  858 F.2d 195· 4th Cir.· 1988-09-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining the plaintiff's position was temporary and in declining to award attorney's fees.
• Midtec Paper Corp. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  857 F.2d 1487· D.C. Cir.· 1988-09-16 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's decision applying its Competitive Access Rules was consistent with its statutory mandate and supported by substantial evidence, thus denying the petition for review.
• Colo. Health Care Ass'n v. Colo. Dep't OF Soc. Servs.
  842 F.2d 1158· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the State's elimination of the incentive allowance, even if for budgetary reasons, did not violate the Boren Amendment as long as the overall reimbursement rate remained reasonable and adequate. The State's actions were found to be procedurally and substantive
• Dickerson v. Adm'r, Env't Prot. Agency
  834 F.2d 974· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that CERCLA precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of EPA response actions, and the EPA's decision to enter the property for cleanup was not arbitrary and capricious.
• Abramowitz v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  832 F.2d 1071· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-03 ·cited 14×·via Administrative Procedure Act (Apa) Arbitrary And Capricious Standard
  The court held that the EPA exceeded its statutory authority by approving air pollution control measures in California's State Implementation Plan without requiring a demonstration that those measures would achieve attainment of air quality standards by the statutory deadline.
• Nat'l Fed'n OF Fed. Emps. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth.
  828 F.2d 834· D.C. Cir.· 1987-09-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a union proposal for a member on an agency panel responsible for developing promotion candidate rating criteria directly interferes with management's statutory right to select candidates for appointment and is therefore nonnegotiable.
• Chong v. Dir., United States Info. Agency & Dist. Dir., Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., Pittsburgh
  821 F.2d 171· 3d Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the USIA's decision not to recommend a waiver is subject to limited judicial review under an abuse of discretion standard, but that the USIA did not abuse its discretion in this case.
• George Hyman Constr. Co. v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  816 F.2d 753· D.C. Cir.· 1987-04-21 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that Hyman is entitled to recover home office overhead costs calculated by the Eichleay formula, but is not entitled to recover the cost of equity capital due to WMATA's sovereign immunity.
• Consol. Rail Corp. v. The United States & the Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  812 F.2d 1444· 3d Cir.· 1987-02-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Commission's formulation of the Management Efficiency constraint was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law because it allowed carriers to pass on the costs of inefficiencies to consumers.
• Bacashihua v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd.
  811 F.2d 1498· Fed. Cir.· 1987-02-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) did not err in dismissing the appeal as untimely because the employee failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay. The notice of appeal rights was not misleading under the applicable law for Postal Service employees
• Farmworker Just. Fund, Inc. v. Brock
  811 F.2d 613· D.C. Cir.· 1987-02-06 ·cited 14×
  The Secretary of Labor's decision to delay issuing field sanitation rules for two years violated the 1982 settlement agreement by further postponing either promulgation or a final decision not to promulgate.
• Phillips Petroleum Co. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  803 F.2d 545· 10th Cir.· 1986-10-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the EPA's regulation and that the Safe Drinking Water Act empowers the EPA to promulgate underground injection control regulations for Indian lands.
• Olmsted Citizens FOR A Better Cmty. v. United States
  793 F.2d 201· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-09 ·cited 14×
  The court should not have disposed of the case on summary judgment, and a trial is necessary to determine if an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was required.
• New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division v. Thomas
  789 F.2d 825· 10th Cir.· 1986-04-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the EPA's disapproval of New Mexico's State Implementation Plan (SIP) and imposition of sanctions were not arbitrary and capricious, and that the agency correctly applied sanctions under 42 U.S.C. § 7506(a).
• United AIR Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  766 F.2d 1107· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Civil Aeronautics Board had the authority to issue rules prohibiting unfair or deceptive practices under Section 411 of the Federal Aviation Act, and that informal rulemaking was a permissible procedure for doing so. The court also found the Board's antitr
• The R.R. Comm'n OF Tex. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  765 F.2d 221· D.C. Cir.· 1985-06-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the ICC's denial of certification to the Railroad Commission of Texas was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, and that no procedural errors occurred.
• Reynolds Metals Co. & United States Brewers Ass'n v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  760 F.2d 549· 4th Cir.· 1985-05-01 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the EPA's effluent limitations for the canmaking industry, finding the agency's actions were not arbitrary or capricious.
• Edwards v. Wilkes-Barre Publ'g Co. Pension Tr. & Wilkes-Barre Publ'g Co.
  757 F.2d 52· 3d Cir.· 1985-03-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that pension plan trustees did not act arbitrarily and capriciously or violate ERISA by including uncompensated strike time in the calculation of pension benefits.
• Munoz-Santana v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  742 F.2d 561· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by ordering discovery that was unduly burdensome and by imposing a sanction (default judgment) for noncompliance when the agency showed significant expense, partial compliance, and alternative means for the requesting p
• Offutt v. Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  735 F.2d 948· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the ERISA plan administrator's denial of benefits was not arbitrary or capricious was correct, and that the standard of review for such decisions is 'arbitrary or capricious'.
• Distrigas OF Mass. Corp. & Distrigas Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  737 F.2d 1208· 1st Cir.· 1984-06-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Commission's decision to deduct deferred tax liabilities from DOMAC's rate base was arbitrary and unjustified, but affirmed the Commission's decision regarding who should bear the cost of those liabilities.
• City OF Bedford v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  718 F.2d 1164· D.C. Cir.· 1983-10-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission did not violate the Federal Power Act by issuing preliminary permits without investigating potential joint ventures with private developers, as the agency's enforcement priorities and reliance on certification were reas
• Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n OF the United States, Inc. v. Ruckelshaus
  719 F.2d 1159· D.C. Cir.· 1983-10-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the EPA Administrator reasonably exercised discretion under the Clean Air Act in promulgating short test regulations, meeting all statutory prerequisites.
• Bellotti v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States
  725 F.2d 1380· D.C. Cir.· 1983-09-23 ·cited 14×
  The Commission has the authority to define the scope of its proceedings, and the Attorney General was not entitled to intervene in this license modification proceeding because the proceeding's scope, as defined by the Commission, did not affect his interests.
• Town OF Orangetown v. Anne Gorsuch
  718 F.2d 29· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the EPA's determination of 'no significant impact' was not arbitrary or capricious, and thus an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was not required under NEPA.
• Wis. Elec. Power Co. v. Costle
  715 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the EPA's designation of Milwaukee as a nonattainment area for SO2 and its denial of a rulemaking petition to redesignate the area were consistent with the Clean Air Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Am. Fed'n OF Gov't Emps., AFL-CIO v. Nimmo
  711 F.2d 28· 4th Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the veterans must exhaust their administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief regarding the VA's cost recovery program.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. United Ass'n OF Journeymen & Apprentices OF THE Plumbing & Pipefitting Indus.
  704 F.2d 1164· 9th Cir.· 1983-04-28 ·cited 14×
  The National Labor Relations Board's order is enforced because its interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement was reasonable and supported by substantial evidence, and it properly exercised its authority to decide the jurisdictional dispute.
• Steere Tank Lines, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  703 F.2d 927· 5th Cir.· 1983-04-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's order granting Cactus Transport, Inc. a certificate of public convenience and necessity was neither arbitrary nor capricious and was based on substantial evidence.
• Anderson v. U.S. Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  701 F.2d 112· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that HUD's denial of the mortgage assignment request was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, and that the mortgagee did not violate regulations by initiating foreclosure.
• First Nat'l Bank OF Bellaire v. Comptroller OF the Currency
  697 F.2d 674· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-07 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge holds that the Comptroller did not err in determining the bank operated with inadequate capital and had the authority to order the recall of an illegal loan to an officer, even after the statutory limit increased.