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

• Adams v. Avondale Indus., Inc.
  905 F.2d 943· 6th Cir.· 1990-06-15 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Limited Severance Plan validly amended the unwritten severance plan, precluding severance benefits, but Avondale's vacation pay obligation had vested and was not discharged by Trinity.
• Pennzoil Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  789 F.2d 1128· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) fundamentally misconstrued this Court's prior decision in Pennzoil by misapplying the Order 23 presumption and failing to properly construe contract language under state law.
• 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
• Peckham v. Bd. OF Trs. OF the Int'l Bhd. OF Painters & Allied Trades Union & Indus. Nat'l Pension Fund
  653 F.2d 424· 10th Cir.· 1981-05-12 ·cited 31×
  The Pension Fund's denial of benefits to self-employed individuals who were also employers and signatories to collective bargaining agreements was not arbitrary or capricious under ERISA.
• Groos Nat'l Bank & Clinton Manges v. Comptroller OF the Currency
  573 F.2d 889· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-26 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a declaratory judgment action challenging the validity of a 1973 agreement between a bank and the Comptroller, as such actions are barred by 12 U.S.C. § 1818(i) except as provided within the administrative re
• Udall v. Washington
  398 F.2d 765· D.C. Cir.· 1968-06-12 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior's regulations restricting commercial bus use on the George Washington Memorial Parkway were not arbitrary or capricious and had a rational basis, reversing the lower court's decision to invalidate them.
• Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Hanson
  859 F.2d 313· 4th Cir.· 1988-10-14 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the award of attorneys' fees to NWF under the Clean Water Act, finding them a prevailing party, but vacated the fee computation based on current rates, remanding for recalculation using historic rates.
• Dep't OF Transp. v. Fortune Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  532 So. 2d 1267· Fla.· 1988-08-18 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of section 337.27(3), which permits the Department of Transportation to condemn an entire parcel of land even when only part is needed for a public project, if doing so costs less than condemning only the needed portion. The
• Gaines v. The Amalgamated Ins. Fund
  753 F.2d 288· 3d Cir.· 1985-01-23 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Trustees' interpretation of the pension plan, requiring eligibility for Social Security disability benefits within nine months of termination of employment, is a reasonable and permissible interpretation.
• Bennie Stewart, Jr. v. Thigpen
  730 F.2d 1002· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-30 ·cited 30×
  A prisoner's failure to move for a directed verdict on certain claims at trial precludes him from raising the sufficiency of the evidence for those claims on appeal, and jury verdicts will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence.
• Alascom, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  727 F.2d 1212· D.C. Cir.· 1984-02-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the challenges to the FCC's order regarding Digital Electronic Message Service (DEMS) were not ripe for judicial review because they presented abstract disagreements rather than concrete controversies.
• Villa View Cmty. Hosp., Inc. v. Heckler
  720 F.2d 1086· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Secretary's disallowance of Medicare reimbursement for Villa View's amortization of land use costs lacked a rational basis and was unsupported by substantial evidence.
• State OF S.C. ex rel. Leslie E. Tindal v. Block
  717 F.2d 874· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Secretary of Agriculture complied with the Administrative Procedure Act in implementing a milk deduction program and that the authorizing legislation is constitutional.
• Prof'l Drivers Council v. Bureau OF Motor Carrier Safety
  706 F.2d 1216· D.C. Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the Secretary of Transportation's decision not to amend truck driver hours-of-service regulations, finding the termination of rulemaking and denial of a petition to recommence proceedings were not arbitrary or capricious.
• 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.
• Nepco Mun. Rate Comm. & the Elec. Dep'ts & Plants of Ashburnham v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  668 F.2d 1327· D.C. Cir.· 1981-10-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that FERC permissibly excluded unamortized expenditures for cancelled projects from the rate base, allowed recovery over time, and properly treated investment tax credit funds by assigning them the overall rate of return.
• Nw. Airlines, Inc. v. Goldschmidt
  645 F.2d 1309· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-02 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Secretary of Transportation had the statutory authority to issue Special Federal Aviation Regulation 43 (SFAR 43) to allocate airport slots for efficient airspace utilization, and that the regulation was not arbitrary, capricious, or procedurally flawed.
• Baker v. Bell
  630 F.2d 1046· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court correctly applied the 'special efforts' standard under the UMT Act, but erred in limiting the Section 504 claims to review of the administrative record, remanding for further consideration of those claims.
• Argo-Collier Truck Lines Corp. & Refrigerated Transp. Co., Inc. v. The United States & the Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  611 F.2d 149· 6th Cir.· 1979-12-13 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the ICC's decision to grant Watkins Motor Lines a common carrier certification was not supported by substantial evidence and was arbitrary and capricious.
• Nat'l Indus. Sand Ass'n v. Marshall
  601 F.2d 689· 3d Cir.· 1979-05-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor's training regulations under the Mine Act were a reasonable and statutorily authorized exercise of rulemaking power, and that the definitions of 'operator' and 'miner' were not arbitrary or capricious.
• Boyle v. The United States
  515 F.2d 1397· Ct. Cl.· 1975-05-14 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the dismissal of the two historians was not arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence, and the administrative proceedings were not procedurally defective.
• Young v. United States
  498 F.2d 1211· 5th Cir.· 1974-08-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the plaintiff is entitled to judicial review of his discharge under the Administrative Procedure Act, as his employment interest was protected by the Fifth Amendment's due process clause.
• Commonwealth OF Pa. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  500 F.2d 246· 3d Cir.· 1974-06-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Administrator's requirement for an air bleed retrofit program in Allegheny County was arbitrary and capricious due to lack of factual support, but the program for Philadelphia was permissible. The court also found that the Clean Air Act allows federal enfo
• Scheelhaase v. Woodbury Cent. Cmty. Sch. Dist.
  488 F.2d 237· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-28 ·cited 30×
  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.
• Ulysses S. Vigil v. Post Off. Dep't OF the United States & The United States
  406 F.2d 921· 10th Cir.· 1969-01-29 ·cited 30×
• L. W. Foster Sportswear Co., Inc. v. The United States
  405 F.2d 1285· Ct. Cl.· 1969-01-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that defective specifications, not minor or expectable, entitled the contractor to an equitable adjustment in contract price, and the delay was attributable to the government.
• H.L.C. & Assocs. Constr. Co., Inc. v. The United States
  367 F.2d 586· Ct. Cl.· 1966-06-10 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the release for mortgage area A was ineffective because the agency waived the requirement for a specifically delineated exception by accepting a broad, meaningless release and making final payment. The court affirmed the ASBCA's decision regarding mortgage are
• VAN Curler Broad. Corp. v. United States & Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  236 F.2d 727· D.C. Cir.· 1956-07-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that allowing ad hoc departures from allocation tables pre-judges issues pending in deintermixture proceedings, violating the spirit of Ashbacker.
• Bowman v. Bowles
  140 F.2d 974· Emer. Ct. App.· 1944-02-24 ·cited 30×
  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
• Duncan E. MacKenzie v. City OF Rockledge
  920 F.2d 1554· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the plaintiff had no constitutionally protected property interest in a building permit for a marina, and therefore his due process claim failed. The court also found no equal protection or unconstitutional taking violations.
• Egert v. Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. & Emp. Benefit Plan of the Canteen Corp.
  900 F.2d 1032· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-17 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the insurance carrier's denial of coverage for IVF treatments was arbitrary and capricious because the plan covered 'illness' and the carrier's own guidelines acknowledged infertility as an illness, contradicting their denial of IVF while covering other infert
• Lakey v. Remington Arms Co., Inc.
  874 F.2d 541· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-10 ·cited 29×
  The court held that an employer's denial of severance benefits is reviewed under the arbitrary and capricious standard if the plan grants the administrator discretionary authority to construe its terms, and that denial was not arbitrary or capricious when employees were immediate
• Adcock v. The Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  822 F.2d 623· 6th Cir.· 1987-06-26 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the employer's interpretation of its termination pay plan, requiring unemployment as a prerequisite for benefits, was not arbitrary or capricious and was consistent with past practices. However, the court vacated the lower court's determination that the benefi
• Crews v. Central States
  788 F.2d 332· 6th Cir.· 1986-04-14 ·cited 29×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review For Trustee Decisions
  The court held that the trustees' denial of a refund was not arbitrary or capricious because the contractual limitations on recovery and the distinction between mistakes of fact and law barred the claim.
• Robbins v. Reagan
  780 F.2d 37· D.C. Cir.· 1985-12-10 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case, as there was no federal law to apply regarding the agency's discretionary actions. The court also found that the district court improperly conditioned the closing of the shelter on the pro
• 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.
• Govoni v. Bricklayers
  732 F.2d 250· 1st Cir.· 1984-04-24 ·cited 29×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review For Trustee Decisions
  The court held that the pension fund trustees' interpretation of the 'break in service' provision was reasonable and that the plaintiff failed to show prejudice from any inadequacy in the summary plan description.
• Edison v. Dep't OF THE Army
  672 F.2d 840· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the appellant failed to prove the Army acted unreasonably in maintaining his records, that the promotion boards saw incorrect security clearance information, or that any inaccuracies caused his non-selection for promotion.
• Philadelphia Citizens IN Action by Roxanne Jones v. Schweiker
  669 F.2d 877· 3d Cir.· 1982-01-15 ·cited 29×
  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.
• Gulf OIL Corp. v. The Honorable Rogers C. B. Morton
  493 F.2d 141· 9th Cir.· 1973-11-27 ·cited 29×
• Goos v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  911 F.2d 1283· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's issuance of a Notice of Interim Trail Use under the Rails to Trails Act is not a "major federal action" requiring compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
• United States v. R.W. Meyer, Inc.
  889 F.2d 1497· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that indirect costs are recoverable under CERCLA as part of the total response costs, and that the SARA amendment authorizing prejudgment interest could be applied retroactively.
• Mich. Consol. GAS Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  883 F.2d 117· D.C. Cir.· 1989-08-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) did not exceed its jurisdiction or act arbitrarily and capriciously in granting Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company a certificate to transport natural gas directly to National Steel Corporation, bypassing the loc
• Rajiv Bali v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield Ass'n & Health Care Serv. Corp.
  873 F.2d 1043· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-01 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the denial of benefits was not arbitrary or capricious because the plaintiff failed to provide reasonably requested medical documentation, even though a substantive review of the available evidence might lead to a different conclusion.
• In re Heci Exploration Co., Inc. v. Holloway
  862 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the Plan waived its right to apply federal law by failing to raise it in the lower courts, and that the bankruptcy court's findings were not clearly erroneous under Texas law.
• Reilly v. Blue Cross AND Blue Shield United OF Wisconsin
  846 F.2d 416· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-05 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the denial of benefits was a reasonable interpretation of the plan, and therefore the case should be affirmed.
• Am. Mining Cong. & Engelhard Corp. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  824 F.2d 1177· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-31 ·cited 28×
  The EPA's interpretation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to regulate certain recycled industrial materials is a reasonable construction of an ambiguous statute and should be deferred to.
• Pinkie A. Brown v. Ret. Comm. OF the Briggs & Stratton Ret. Plan
  797 F.2d 521· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-01 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Retirement Committee's denial of disability benefits was not arbitrary and capricious, was supported by substantial evidence, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to a jury trial or Fifth Amendment due process violation under ERISA.
• The City OF Aurora v. Hunt
  749 F.2d 1457· 10th Cir.· 1984-12-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the FAA's implementation of a new approach procedure did not violate the Administrative Procedure Act or the National Environmental Policy Act, as the agency followed proper procedures and provided reasoned explanations for deviations from its safety rules.
• August S. Carstens v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States
  742 F.2d 1546· D.C. Cir.· 1984-09-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission acted within its broad statutory authority in granting operating licenses for SONGS Units 2 and 3, and its decision was supported by substantial evidence.