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

• Meadville Master Antenna, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  535 F.2d 214· 3d Cir.· 1976-04-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Commission's rejection of subscriber survey evidence regarding signal quality was arbitrary and capricious, failing to adequately consider the public interest in signal quality.
• Sellers v. Ciccone
  530 F.2d 199· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prison's policy requiring inmates to be within ten years of their release date to be eligible for the x-ray technician training program was not arbitrary or capricious.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Crockett-Bradley, Inc.
  523 F.2d 449· 5th Cir.· 1975-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's designation of truck drivers as an appropriate bargaining unit was supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious, and that a bargaining order was a proper remedy for the company's unfair labor practices.
• Hobart A. Baker v. Schlesinger
  523 F.2d 1031· 6th Cir.· 1975-10-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 to entertain the mandamus action and that the appellee was not denied effective assistance of counsel. Therefore, the district court erred in granting the writ.
• Houston Bus Hill and Thurman S. Hurst v. Hon. Rogers C. B. Morton
  525 F.2d 327· 10th Cir.· 1975-10-02 ·cited 4×
  A district court reviewing administrative action must inquire into facts and state supporting facts for appellate review.
• City OF Pembroke Pines v. Harrison C. Blacker and Edna M. Blacker
  314 So. 2d 195· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-06-13 ·cited 4×
  The court reversed the trial court's rezoning order, holding that the city's residential zoning classification was fairly debatable and the property owners failed to prove it was arbitrary, unreasonable, or confiscatory.
• Indep. Bankers Ass'n OF Am. v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys.
  500 F.2d 812· D.C. Cir.· 1974-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Board of Governors' adoption of Regulation J was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
• Ariz. Pub. Serv. Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  490 F.2d 783· D.C. Cir.· 1974-01-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Commission adequately established that an environmental impact statement was not required and that the petitioner was not deprived of any procedural rights.
• Schirtzinger v. Dunlop
  489 F.2d 1307· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1973-12-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that subsequent amendments to the Cost of Living Council regulations mooted the plaintiff's claims regarding product cost pass-through and that the remaining alleged discrimination in non-product cost pass-through did not violate due process or the Economic Stabili
• S. Gwinnett Venture v. W. R. (Dudge) Pruitt
  482 F.2d 389· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-04 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs' complaint, finding that they were afforded procedural due process and failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Schicke v. Romney
  474 F.2d 309· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-20 ·cited 4×·via Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard
  The court held that the Secretary of HUD's approval of open-space land conversion was invalid because the administrative record did not demonstrate compliance with the statutory requirement to find the conversion was in accord with the applicable comprehensive plan.
• Marcus v. The United States
  473 F.2d 896· Ct. Cl.· 1973-02-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff, appointed from the Civil Service Register and placed on probationary status, was not entitled to the procedural safeguards of the Veterans' Preference Act upon his dismissal for inefficiency.
• The City OF Burlington v. Turner
  471 F.2d 120· 8th Cir.· 1973-01-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Administrator's interpretation of 'reasonable and just' tolls under the Bridge Act of 1906 was too narrow, and that the trial court erred in not remanding the case for further proceedings.
• Robinson v. Resor
  469 F.2d 944· D.C. Cir.· 1972-10-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Army Discharge Review Board's decision to deny an honorable discharge was arbitrary and capricious, lacking procedural due process and substantive justice.
• Citizens TO Preserve Foster Park v. Volpe
  466 F.2d 991· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-31 ·cited 4×·via Standard Of Review For Agency Action (Arbitrary, Capricious, Abuse Of Discretion)
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding plaintiffs failed to show probable success on the merits regarding alleged violations of environmental and highway acts.
• Woods v. Elliot Richardson
  465 F.2d 739· 6th Cir.· 1972-08-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while it has jurisdiction to review the Secretary's refusal to reopen a disability claim, the Secretary did not abuse his discretion in refusing to reopen based on the evidence presented at that time.
• Winchester TV Cable Co., Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  462 F.2d 115· 4th Cir.· 1972-06-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the FCC's denial of CATV systems' requests for waivers of the nonduplication rule was not arbitrary or capricious, and affirmed the Commission's orders.
• Haines v. United States
  453 F.2d 233· 3d Cir.· 1971-12-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment, as the administrative record showed no arbitrary or capricious action by the Air Force boards, and the plaintiff's claims of coercion and lack of effective counsel were not substantiated.
• VAN Tran Elec. Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  449 F.2d 774· 6th Cir.· 1971-10-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Board's refusal to consider untimely objections was justified to promote expeditious processing and was not arbitrary.
• The Beryllium Corp. v. The United States
  449 F.2d 362· Ct. Cl.· 1971-10-15 ·cited 4×
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Champa Linen Serv. Co.
  437 F.2d 1259· 10th Cir.· 1971-02-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Board's unit determination was not arbitrary or capricious and that the company had a full hearing in the representation proceedings, thus not requiring relitigation in unfair labor practice proceedings.
• Sisselman v. Smith
  432 F.2d 750· 3d Cir.· 1970-09-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Commandant of the Coast Guard had jurisdiction to issue the bridge permit, and the proceedings did not violate the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Allied Theatre Owners OF Ind., Inc. v. John A. Volpe as Sec'y of Transp.
  426 F.2d 1002· 7th Cir.· 1970-05-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Secretary of Transportation's decision establishing the time zone boundary for Indiana was lawful and not arbitrary or capricious, and that the mandatory observance of daylight saving time was a result of the Uniform Time Act and the Governor's veto, not t
• AIR Line Pilots Ass'n v. Nw. Airlines, Inc.
  415 F.2d 493· 8th Cir.· 1969-09-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in upholding the adjustment board's awards for back pay and reinstatement, but erred in awarding attorneys' fees absent statutory or contractual authority.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union
  413 F.2d 30· 9th Cir.· 1969-05-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's determination that company employees were entitled to unload alumina from company ships was not arbitrary or capricious and should be enforced, with a modification to the cease and desist order.
• Williams v. The United States
  405 F.2d 890· Ct. Cl.· 1969-01-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Navy's determination regarding disability retirement pay was not arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.
• Coral v. Funderberg
  396 F.2d 638· 9th Cir.· 1968-06-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior was not required to grant a leasehold interest to an occupant of an unpatented mining claim who did not meet the statutory definition of a "qualified applicant" as a principal place of residence.
• The Morrison Milling Co. v. Freeman
  365 F.2d 525· D.C. Cir.· 1966-07-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Secretary of Agriculture's regulations requiring processors to acquire marketing certificates based on the amount of wheat 'used' in processing, rather than solely the amount 'contained' in the final product, were a reasonable interpretation of the Agricul
• Richmond v. The Fla. State Bd. OF Architecture
  163 So. 2d 262· Fla.· 1964-04-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statutory standard using dollar cost to define exemptions for architectural practice is not arbitrary, unreasonable, or capricious.
• Heers v. The United States
  357 F.2d 344· Ct. Cl.· 1964-03-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover the bid deposit or the application fee, affirming the denial of the plaintiff's claims.
• Joint Council ON Educ. Broad. & Rochester Area Educ. Television Ass'n, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  305 F.2d 755· D.C. Cir.· 1962-06-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Communications Commission's decision to add VHF Channel 13 to Rochester without reserving it for educational use was not arbitrary or capricious, and that the Commission's preference for commercial competition was supported by the record.
• Wyo. Nat'l Bank of Wilkes-Barre v. United States. Bo-Jack Mfg. Co.
  292 F.2d 511· Ct. Cl.· 1961-07-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that liquidated damages could be assessed on the terminated portion of the contract and that the assignee bank's claim was invalid due to the contractor's default and failure to present evidence.
• Clear Channel Broad. Serv. & WSM, Inc. v. United States & the Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  284 F.2d 222· D.C. Cir.· 1960-10-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the FCC's order, which balanced interference concerns between radio station classes, was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
• Frederick v. United States
  280 F.2d 844· Ct. Cl.· 1960-07-15 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the plaintiff's petition should be dismissed because the Correction Board's decision was not arbitrary and the statute of limitations bars the claim.
• Hunter v. McLAUGHLIN
  252 F.2d 857· D.C. Cir.· 1958-02-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, even when supplemented by his affidavit, failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, as it did not allege bad faith or arbitrary action by the Commissioners.
• Saker v. Woods
  169 F.2d 131· Emer. Ct. App.· 1948-06-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Administrator's order reducing the 'first rent' was supported by substantial evidence and that the complainants' contentions regarding comparability and procedural irregularities were without merit.
• Vanlandingham v. Clark
  163 F.2d 896· Emer. Ct. App.· 1947-10-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Price Administrator did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in establishing lumber price regulations that did not include markups for wholesalers.
• Shaker Parkway Co. v. Porter
  157 F.2d 920· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-11-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Price Administrator had the statutory authority to prohibit landlords of priority-constructed housing from demanding, receiving, or retaining security deposits, as such deposits constitute 'rent' or fall under regulations preventing circumvention of rent c
• Mevorah v. Bowles
  151 F.2d 766· Emer. Ct. App.· 1945-11-13 ·cited 4×
  The Administrator's determination that the complainant failed to establish a selling price line for blouses based on sample sales was not arbitrary or capricious.
• Gable Mgmt. Corp. of La. v. Bowles
  151 F.2d 82· Emer. Ct. App.· 1945-08-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Administrator's determination of maximum rental rates for Gable Lodges was supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious.
• Crawford & Doherty Foundry Co. v. Bowles
  146 F.2d 861· Emer. Ct. App.· 1944-09-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Administrator was not arbitrary or capricious in denying a price adjustment because the complainant's profit margin was adequate to maintain production.
• Bidi Vapor LLC v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin.
  134 F.4th 1282· 11th Cir.· 2025-04-24 ·cited 3×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the FDA's Marketing Denial Order, finding the agency's decision based on Bidi Classic's high abuse liability was reasonable and not arbitrary or capricious.
• Lowman v. Fed. Aviation Admin.
  83 F.4th 1345· 11th Cir.· 2023-10-12 ·cited 3×
  Residents near Lakeland Linder International Airport challenged the Federal Aviation Administration's approval of an airport expansion project, arguing the FAA violated the National Environmental Policy Act by improperly segmenting the development into separate projects, failing
• Hewitt v. Commissioner of IRS
  21 F.4th 1336· 11th Cir.· 2021-12-29 ·cited 3×
  David and Tammy Hewitt challenged the Tax Court's disallowance of their charitable contribution deduction for donating a conservation easement, arguing that the Treasury regulation governing extinguishment proceeds was procedurally invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act b
• Conservancy OF Sw. Fla. v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv.
  677 F.3d 1073· 11th Cir.· 2012-04-18 ·cited 3×
  Environmental advocacy groups challenged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's denial of petitions to designate critical habitat for the Florida panther under the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing the denial was arbitrary and capricious. The Eleventh Circuit held that the Serv
• Epolito v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am.
  737 F. Supp. 2d 1364· M.D. Fla.· 2010-09-02 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plan's definition of 'Employer' encompassed Unitrin and its affiliates, meaning pension benefits accrued under a former owner were deductible. The court adopted Florida's contract interpretation rules and the doctrine of contra proferentem for ERISA cases.
• Herman v. Metro. Life Ins.
  689 F. Supp. 2d 1316· M.D. Fla.· 2010-02-11 ·cited 3×
  The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report, granting MetLife summary judgment on the plaintiff's claim for benefits and denying MetLife's counterclaim for reimbursement of overpaid benefits.
• Murray v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins.
  623 F. Supp. 2d 1341· M.D. Fla.· 2009-06-11 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the insurer's denial of long-term disability benefits was not wrong, as the plaintiff was capable of performing light work during the elimination period based on the policy's definition of disability and the available medical evidence.
• Epolito v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am.
  523 F. Supp. 2d 1329· M.D. Fla.· 2007-10-10 ·cited 3×
  The court granted Plaintiff's dispositive motion for summary judgment, finding the defendant's denial of benefits was not supported by sufficient evidence and was arbitrary and capricious. The court denied Plaintiff's partial motion regarding offsets, remanding that issue to the
• Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Eng'rs
  464 F. Supp. 2d 1171· M.D. Fla.· 2006-11-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Corps' issuance of regional general permit SAJ-86 did not violate the Clean Water Act or the National Environmental Policy Act, and vacated the preliminary injunction.