Arbitrary and Capricious

3,786 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 448 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Cont'l Bus. Enters., Inc. v. The United States
  452 F.2d 1016· Ct. Cl.· 1971-12-10 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that a bidder alleging arbitrary and capricious government action in the procurement process is entitled to a trial, even if the government agency has broad discretion, especially when there are disputed facts regarding the necessity of negotiation and the basis fo
• 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
• Daub v. United States
  292 F.2d 895· Ct. Cl.· 1961-07-19 ·cited 30×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Army's arbitrary and capricious application of its own regulations, resulting in a disproportionate penalty for the plaintiff's first offense, entitled him to back pay and recovery.
• Wilton E. Hall & Greenville Television Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  237 F.2d 567· D.C. Cir.· 1956-09-06 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Commission erred in rejecting propagation curves as evidence and in finding no misrepresentation by the intervenor.
• 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
• Hillcrest Terrace Corp. v. Brown
  137 F.2d 663· Emer. Ct. App.· 1943-07-27 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Administrator acted arbitrarily in denying a protest for rent adjustment when the initial rent was based on a temporary tax exemption that expired, as this situation was not a product of normal market conditions.
• 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×
  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×
  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×
• Jimenez v. Barber
  252 F.2d 550· 9th Cir.· 1958-01-30 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the appeal presented no substantial question and dismissed the appeal as frivolous, denying the motion for a temporary restraining order.
• 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×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review
  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.
• Nat'l Fed'n OF Fed. Emps. v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  818 F.2d 935· D.C. Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 28×
  The court held that federal district courts have subject matter jurisdiction to hear challenges to mandatory drug testing programs for federal employees, and that prospective injunctive relief is not barred by the availability of a damages remedy.
• 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.
• Grove Isle, Ltd. v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Env't Reg.
  454 So. 2d 571· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-03-22 ·cited 28×
  Grove Isle challenges two Department of Environmental Regulation rules governing permit issuance for activities in Outstanding Florida Waters, particularly Biscayne Bay. The court upheld Rule 17-3.041 but invalidated Rule 17-4.242 to the extent it imposes an undefined 'public int
• Bessemer & Lake Erie R.R. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  691 F.2d 1104· 3d Cir.· 1982-10-19 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the ICC's order adopting a single standard of revenue adequacy based on the current cost of capital, finding it consistent with statutory mandates and not arbitrary or capricious. The court also found the carrier petition regarding unused rail properties not ri
• Indep. U. S. Tanker Owners Comm. v. Drew Lewis
  690 F.2d 908· D.C. Cir.· 1982-09-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the agency's interim rule was procedurally flawed due to a lack of an adequate statement of basis and purpose, but substantively permissible as the agency was not required to limit its discretion through rulemaking. The court also found procedural and substant
• Alschuler v. Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  686 F.2d 472· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that neighborhood residents have standing to challenge HUD's approval of a low-income housing project based on concerns about racial and economic concentration, but not for claims solely benefiting project inhabitants.
• MCI Telecomms. Corp. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  675 F.2d 408· D.C. Cir.· 1982-04-13 ·cited 28×
  The FCC's decision to adopt an interim cost allocation methodology based on the Jurisdictional Separations Manual, rather than FDC-7, was a reasonable exercise of discretion, supported by adequate explanation, and not arbitrary or capricious.
• The Conn. Light & Power Co. v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n
  673 F.2d 525· D.C. Cir.· 1982-03-16 ·cited 28×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review
  The court affirmed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's fire protection regulations, finding that while procedural issues existed, the agency's actions were not arbitrary or capricious and the final rules were a logical outgrowth of the proposed rules.
• Quinn v. Burlington N. Inc. Pension Plan
  664 F.2d 675· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-30 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Burlington Northern Pension Plan Administrator could offset pension benefits even after the employee elected to receive a salary in lieu of pension benefits from another plan, as the employee remained entitled to vested pension benefits.
• The Cleveland-Cliffs Iron Co. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  664 F.2d 568· 6th Cir.· 1981-11-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) acted within its jurisdiction and authority in determining freight rates, including ordering refunds, and that its 'contract rates policy' was a valid policy statement not requiring formal rulemaking. However, the ICC a
• Horn v. Mullins
  650 F.2d 35· 4th Cir.· 1981-05-27 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trustees' denial of a disability pension was arbitrary and capricious because their conclusion that the disability did not result from a mine accident was not supported by substantial evidence.
• United States v. Winthrop Towers
  628 F.2d 1028· 7th Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·cited 28×
  The court held that HUD's decision to foreclose a mortgage is subject to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act for being arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise unlawful, and that the district court erred in finding such decisions unreviewable.
• Ellis v. The United States
  610 F.2d 760· Ct. Cl.· 1979-12-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the plaintiff, LeRoy Ellis, was a "firefighter" for the purposes of special annuity rights under 5 U.S.C. § 8336(c), and that the Civil Service Commission's denial of his retirement annuity was arbitrary and capricious.
• Ashton v. Civiletti
  613 F.2d 923· D.C. Cir.· 1979-10-04 ·cited 28×
  The FBI's communications to an employee created a property interest in his job, entitling him to due process protections before termination, and the district court erred in granting summary judgment.
• Wayne State Univ. v. Cleland
  590 F.2d 627· 6th Cir.· 1978-12-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that 38 U.S.C. § 211(a) does not bar judicial review of the Administrator's authority to promulgate regulations. The court reversed the district court's finding that the V.A. regulations were promulgated without statutory authority.
• Grigsby v. Dep't OF Energy
  585 F.2d 1069· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1978-05-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the FEA's interpretation of 'property' to include unitized leases was a rational interpretation of its regulation, and that a contract price does not qualify as a 'posted price' for determining ceiling prices under the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act.
• N. Ohio Lung Ass'n & Patricia Smith v. Env't Prot. Agency
  572 F.2d 1143· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the EPA Administrator did not err in approving Ohio's revised attainment date for particulate matter emissions, and that the utilities' claims of technological infeasibility were foreclosed by prior Supreme Court precedent.
• Weslie C. Haneke v. Secretary of Health
  535 F.2d 1291· D.C. Cir.· 1976-05-06 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Civil Service Commission must investigate claims of improper classification when an employee alleges doing identical work to others classified differently, as refusing to do so violates the principle of equal pay for substantially equal work.
• Elba E. Wroblaski v. Hampton
  528 F.2d 852· 7th Cir.· 1976-01-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Board of Appeals and Review's decision to separate the plaintiff from her position had a rational basis and affirmed the summary judgment.
• Am. Pub. Power Ass'n v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  522 F.2d 142· D.C. Cir.· 1975-11-03 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the Commission's decision regarding rulemaking and refund proposals.