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

• Fed. Election Comm'n v. Congressman Charles G. Rose
  806 F.2d 1081· D.C. Cir.· 1986-12-02 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the Federal Election Commission's position was substantially justified, reversing the award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
• Kinnett Dairies, Inc. v. Farrow
  580 F.2d 1260· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 66×
  The court noted that the obscurity of federal regulations created unnecessary burdens on parties and the judicial system.
• Indep. Meat Packers Ass'n v. Butz
  526 F.2d 228· 8th Cir.· 1975-11-14 ·cited 65×
  The court held that the district court erred in enjoining the USDA's revised beef grading regulations, finding that the Executive Order 11821 claim was not judicially enforceable and that the USDA did not exceed its statutory authority or act arbitrarily and capriciously in promu
• Ellenburg v. Brockway
  763 F.2d 1091· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-20 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the plaintiff's state law claim was preempted by ERISA, and the employer's denial of early retirement benefits was not arbitrary or capricious, but remanded the issue of attorneys' fees for the trial court to state its reasons.
• Computer & Commc'ns Indus. Ass'n v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  693 F.2d 198· D.C. Cir.· 1982-11-12 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the FCC's Computer II rulemaking, which deregulated enhanced services and customer premises equipment (CPE) under Title II and instead relied on ancillary jurisdiction and market forces, was a reasonable exercise of the Commission's authority under the Communi
• S. Gwinnett Venture v. W. R. (Dudge) Pruitt
  491 F.2d 5· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-14 ·cited 64×
• Pac. Coast Meat Jobbers Ass'n, Inc. v. The Cost OF Living Council
  481 F.2d 1388· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1973-08-18 ·cited 64×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, and that the C.L.C.'s actions had a rational basis and were within its statutory authority.
• Environmental v. Froehlke
  473 F.2d 346· 8th Cir.· 1972-12-14 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the Corps of Engineers' environmental impact statement was inadequate under NEPA because it failed to sufficiently discuss alternatives and mitigation measures. The court also held that congressional appropriations do not exempt a project from NEPA's requireme
• Shellie P. McKNIGHT v. S. Life & Health Ins. Co.
  758 F.2d 1566· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-30 ·cited 63×
  An employee is entitled to retirement plan credit for isolated segments of service if the plan's summary booklet, when interpreted literally, supports such credit, even if the employer argues for a different interpretation of the main plan.
• Gueory v. Robert E. Hampton (Chairman of the United States Civil Serv. Commission)
  510 F.2d 1222· D.C. Cir.· 1974-09-09 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the district court erred in requiring a specific showing of how an employee's criminal conduct deleteriously affected suitability for employment, as the nexus between manslaughter and the efficiency of the service was clear.
• Newell v. Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  904 F.2d 644· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-28 ·cited 62×
  The court held that Prudential did not violate ERISA by having its employee make benefit determinations, but erred in applying the arbitrary and capricious standard without heightened scrutiny due to a conflict of interest, and that the delay in notification of benefit denials co
• Sierra Club v. Secretary OF the Army
  820 F.2d 513· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-03 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the district court properly conducted an independent analysis to determine substantial justification and that the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) permits cost of living adjustments to attorney fees even after its reenactment.
• Friends OF Endangered Species, Inc. v. Jantzen
  760 F.2d 976· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-14 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the Service did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in issuing the permit under the Endangered Species Act and complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. ST. Francis Hosp. OF Lynwood
  601 F.2d 404· 9th Cir.· 1979-07-18 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the Board's per se policy of creating separate bargaining units for registered nurses is inconsistent with congressional intent to prevent undue proliferation of units in the healthcare industry.
• Appalachian Power Co. v. Russell E. Train Env't Prot. Agency
  545 F.2d 1351· 4th Cir.· 1976-07-16 ·cited 62×
  The court clarified its prior opinion, amending references to variance clauses and directing reconsideration of certain regulations, while denying other requested modifications.
• Algonac Mfg. Co. (a Close Mich. Corporation) & John A. Maxwell v. The United States
  428 F.2d 1241· Ct. Cl.· 1970-07-15 ·cited 62×
  The court held that John A. Maxwell was not a proper party to sue on contract claims as he was not the real party in interest, and that tort claims were outside the court's jurisdiction. Claims for the ninth contract were barred by the statute of limitations, and other claims wer
• Kessler v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  326 F.2d 673· D.C. Cir.· 1963-12-20 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the FCC's freeze on radio broadcast applications was a procedural rule change, not a substantive one, and therefore did not require the notice and public rulemaking procedures mandated by the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Alday v. Container Corp. OF Am.
  906 F.2d 660· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 61×
  Modifications to a retiree health insurance plan are permissible under ERISA if the plan documents, including the Summary Plan Description (SPD), clearly reserve the right to amend or terminate the plan, and other communications do not constitute formal plan documents or valid am
• Denton v. First Nat'l Bank OF Waco
  765 F.2d 1295· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the district court erred in not applying ERISA's arbitrary and capricious standard to the Plan fiduciary's denial of benefits and that the doctrine of exhaustion of remedies is applicable.
• Se. Alaska Conservation Council, Inc. v. Watson
  697 F.2d 1305· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-31 ·cited 60×
  The court held that ANILCA subsection 503(h)(3) requires an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for bulk sampling activities, and that the proposed 1980-83 amendment activities constitute bulk sampling, thus requiring an EIS before Forest Service authorization.
• G.K. Phillips v. United States Postal Serv.
  695 F.2d 1389· Fed. Cir.· 1982-12-23 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision not to waive the regulatory time limit for filing an appeal was not arbitrary, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.
• Augustine Ponce v. Constr. Laborers Pension Tr. FOR S. Cal.
  628 F.2d 537· 9th Cir.· 1980-09-22 ·cited 59×
  The court held that a pension plan's 15-year vesting requirement may be deemed arbitrary and capricious if it excludes an unusually high percentage of participants, especially when coupled with a decision to significantly increase benefit levels without sufficient justification.
• Pete v. United Mine Workers OF Am. Welf. & Ret. Fund OF 1950
  517 F.2d 1275· D.C. Cir.· 1975-02-12 ·cited 59×
  Miners with at least five years of signatory service (not one year) who were wrongfully denied pension benefits under the invalid "signatory last employment" requirement are entitled to pension benefits retroactive to the date their applications were denied, plus interest at six
• First Nat'l Bank OF Fayetteville v. Smith
  508 F.2d 1371· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the District Court erred in substituting its judgment for the Comptroller's by reweighing the evidence, and that the Comptroller's grant of preliminary approval was not arbitrary or capricious.
• Madge H. Elser and Margaret E. Thomas v. I. A. M. Nat'l Pension Fund
  684 F.2d 648· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-20 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the pension fund's cancellation provisions for past service credit were arbitrary and capricious and violated ERISA and LMRA because the fund failed to provide actuarial evidence justifying the provisions' necessity for financial stability.
• In re Surface Mining Reg. Litig. (three cases). Appeal of Am. Mining Cong.
  627 F.2d 1346· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-02 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the interim regulations promulgated under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 were valid, rejecting challenges based on the adequacy of the basis and purpose statement, the absence of general variance procedures, and the lack of formal econo
• United States v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  652 F.2d 72· D.C. Cir.· 1980-03-07 ·cited 58×
  The FCC has discretion in enforcing the Clayton Act, and its decision to grant a license without an evidentiary hearing, balancing public interest benefits against potential antitrust concerns, was not erroneous.
• Young v. Hampton
  568 F.2d 1253· 7th Cir.· 1977-12-29 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the government's dismissal of an employee for off-duty criminal conduct was arbitrary and capricious because no evidence demonstrated that the conduct impaired the efficiency of the service.
• Paul v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  521 F.2d 194· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-17 ·cited 58×
  The dissenting judge argued that the order of the Board should be vacated and the cause remanded for further evidence development and reconsideration.
• Nader v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & the United States
  513 F.2d 1045· D.C. Cir.· 1975-05-30 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the Atomic Energy Commission's denial of a petition to shut down nuclear power plants was not arbitrary or capricious, as compliance with the Interim Acceptance Criteria provided reasonable assurance of public safety.
• Moshe Leib v. Hillsborough Cnty. Pub. Transp. Comm'n
  558 F.3d 1301· 11th Cir.· 2009-02-19 ·cited 57×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's complaint, holding that the Hillsborough County Public Transportation Commission's "luxury" requirement for limousines did not violate due process or equal protection, was not unconstitutionally vague
• Short v. Central States
  729 F.2d 567· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-12 ·cited 57×
  The court held that owner-operators Short and Zorn were employees under the pension plan, entitling them to benefits, and that procedural requirements for benefit denials were not met in Short's case.
• The Oglala Sioux Tribe OF Indians v. Andrus
  603 F.2d 707· 8th Cir.· 1979-07-27 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) decision to transfer Anthony Whirlwind Horse was arbitrary and capricious, violating the Indian Reorganization Act and the BIA's own consultation policy. The court reversed the district court's denial of injunctive and decla
• Tallahassee Mem'l Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Bowen
  815 F.2d 1435· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-05 ·cited 56×
  Federal courts lack jurisdiction to review claims of 'self-disallowing' hospitals because they never sought reimbursement under the pre-1979 malpractice rule from their fiscal intermediary.
• United States Dep't of Just. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth.
  709 F.2d 724· D.C. Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 56×
  The court held that a union proposal to make probationary federal employee terminations grievable under a collective bargaining agreement is inconsistent with law and therefore not a negotiable subject for bargaining.
• Keco Indus., Inc. v. The United States
  492 F.2d 1200· Ct. Cl.· 1974-02-20 ·cited 56×
  Simple negligence in evaluating a competitor's bid, without bad faith or a complete lack of reasonable basis, is insufficient to warrant recovery of bid preparation expenses by a disappointed bidder.
• Aerojet-General Corp. v. The Am. Arb. Ass'n
  478 F.2d 248· 9th Cir.· 1973-04-30 ·cited 56×
  Judicial review of an arbitrator's locale selection is permissible in extreme cases, but the district court erred in granting an injunction as the AAA's decision was reasonable and not arbitrary or capricious.
• Sierra Club v. Sigler
  695 F.2d 957· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the Corps' voluntary compliance with new CEQ regulations means review must adhere to those regulations, including the 'worst case' analysis requirement. The court also found that the FEIS's failure to conduct a 'worst case' analysis was a violation of NEPA.
• N. Buckhead Civic Ass'n v. Skinner
  903 F.2d 1533· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-26 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) complied with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and affirmed the denial of the injunction.
• Moon v. Am. Home Assurance Co.
  888 F.2d 86· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the denial of benefits under an ERISA plan is reviewed de novo unless the plan expressly grants discretionary authority to the administrator, and that the trial court's application of this standard was harmless error.
• Regents OF the Univ. OF Cal. v. Heckler
  771 F.2d 1182· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-02 ·cited 54×
  The Secretary has a statutory obligation to reimburse all reasonable costs incurred by Medicare providers, and the 1972 amendments authorizing cost limits did not eliminate this duty or the requirement for corrective adjustments when limits prove inadequate.
• Mrs. Geneva B. Phillips v. Kennedy
  542 F.2d 52· 8th Cir.· 1976-09-15 ·cited 54×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review For Trustee Decisions
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment, holding that the trustees' denial of survivor pension benefits was arbitrary and capricious.
• Charlton v. United States & John W. Macy, Jr.
  412 F.2d 390· 3d Cir.· 1969-06-02 ·cited 54×
  The concurring judge agrees that the case must be remanded due to the district court's narrow scope of review but disagrees with the majority's inclusion of the substantial evidence test for reviewing government employee discharges.
• Dori Zardui-Quintana v. Richard
  768 F.2d 1213· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the district director's denial of stays of deportation was not arbitrary or capricious, as the statute does not require separate findings of a "particularly serious crime" and "danger to the community" when a conviction for a particularly serious crime is esta
• Hebra A. Berry v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.
  761 F.2d 1003· 4th Cir.· 1985-05-13 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the arbitrary and capricious standard for reviewing benefit plan decisions is a matter for the court, not a jury, and that the trial court improperly admitted evidence not presented to the plan administrator. The court reversed and remanded for reconsideration
• Tackitt v. Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  758 F.2d 1572· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-30 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the health benefit plan's modification clause was unambiguous, preserving only rights for services received prior to modification, and that the Office of Personnel Management's approval of benefit reductions was not arbitrary or capricious.
• Gosman v. The United States
  573 F.2d 31· Ct. Cl.· 1978-02-22 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the Hearing Panel's decisions regarding depreciation, advertising costs, deferred financing charges, and interest-free loans were not arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence, and affirmed the Panel's rulings.
• Sarasota Cnty. v. Sarasota Church OF Christ, Inc.
  667 So. 2d 180· Fla.· 1995-12-21 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld Sarasota County's special assessment for stormwater services, rejecting religious organizations' challenge that such assessments constitute invalid taxes. The Court held that developed properties receive a special benefit from stormwater treatment
• DE Nobel v. Vitro Corp.
  885 F.2d 1180· 4th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the Vitro retirement plan grants administrators discretionary authority to interpret its terms, thus requiring review under the abuse of discretion standard, not de novo review. The administrators' interpretation was found reasonable, affirming the summary jud
• Md. Dep't OF Human Res. v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  763 F.2d 1441· D.C. Cir.· 1985-06-07 ·cited 52×
  The court held that Maryland's claims for specific relief, even if monetary, fall within the APA's waiver of sovereign immunity and are not precluded by the Tucker Act, allowing them to be heard under federal question jurisdiction.