Arbitrary and Capricious

3,777 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Bank OF Boulder v. Bd. OF Governors OF the Fed. Reserve Sys.
  535 F.2d 1221· 10th Cir.· 1976-06-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Comptroller's actions are not subject to independent review under the Bank Holding Company Act, and the Board of Governors' denial of a hearing and its findings were not arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.
• Porter Cnty. Chapter OF the Izaak Walton League OF Am., Inc. v. The Atomic Energy Comm'n & the United States
  533 F.2d 1011· 7th Cir.· 1976-04-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Atomic Energy Commission's order granting a permit to construct a nuclear power plant was valid, denying the petition for review.
• City OF Santa Rosa v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  534 F.2d 150· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 6×
  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the statutory authority to implement gasoline rationing regulations under the Clean Air Act, and such regulations are not unconstitutional or an abuse of discretion, even if they cause significant economic and social disruption.
• Skrobot v. The United States
  534 F.2d 237· Ct. Cl.· 1975-12-17 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the claimant was legally entitled to a promotion based on the Federal Personnel Manual's provisions regarding job upgrading.
• Local 660 v. City OF Charlotte
  518 F.2d 83· 4th Cir.· 1975-06-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the city's refusal to withhold union dues, without clear standards, was arbitrary and impermissible, despite a statute prohibiting collective bargaining with public employees.
• Eagle Broad. Co. & Wtvy, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  514 F.2d 852· D.C. Cir.· 1975-06-17 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the FCC's decision, holding that the Commission did not abuse its discretion in denying a remand for further UHF impact evidence and that its reasons for allowing an applicant to update its community needs showing were sufficient.
• Bank OF Commerce v. Smith
  513 F.2d 167· 10th Cir.· 1975-03-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff bank failed to exhaust its administrative remedies by not first protesting the bank's organization before the Board of Governors, thus the trial court correctly dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.
• Meva Corp. v. The United States
  511 F.2d 548· Ct. Cl.· 1975-02-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Contracting Officer acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying the plaintiff's requests to substitute a subcontractor, constituting a breach of contract, and that the plaintiff's claim was not barred by estoppel or waiver.
• Federico Francisco Yong & Bergen-Paterson Pipesupport Corp. v. Reg'l Manpower Adm'r
  509 F.2d 243· 9th Cir.· 1975-01-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the administrative record was inadequate to review the denial of alien employment certification because it did not show the basis for denial, the substance of the applicant's response, or that the reviewing officer considered the response.
• Pete v. United Mine Workers OF Am. Welf. & Ret. Fund OF 1950
  517 F.2d 1267· D.C. Cir.· 1974-08-05 ·cited 6×
• Seattle Tr. & Sav. Bank v. The Bank OF Cal., N.A.
  492 F.2d 48· 9th Cir.· 1974-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Comptroller of the Currency properly determined that the Bank of California was 'situated' in Seattle for purposes of the National Bank Act and had its 'principal place of business' in Seattle for purposes of Washington state law, allowing it to open a new
• Denis Hanly v. Kleindienst
  484 F.2d 448· 2d Cir.· 1973-09-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that letters from the General Services Administration (GSA) did not constitute an admission of significant environmental impact requiring an environmental impact statement under NEPA.
• Wash. Mut. Sav. Bank & Grays Harbor Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  482 F.2d 459· 9th Cir.· 1973-07-12 ·cited 6×
  The FDIC does not have discretionary power under the Bank Merger Act of 1966 to deny a merger application based on a competitive standard more stringent than the antitrust laws.
• Joul Small v. The United States
  470 F.2d 1020· Ct. Cl.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 6×
• Allegheny Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  465 F.2d 778· 4th Cir.· 1972-07-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Civil Aeronautics Board's order requiring Allegheny to refund subsidy payments based on tax refunds from later loss years was arbitrary and unenforceable.
• Embrey v. Hampton
  470 F.2d 146· 4th Cir.· 1972-07-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Embrey's discharge from the Post Office was lawful and not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, despite mitigating circumstances.
• Pitts v. Camp
  463 F.2d 632· 4th Cir.· 1972-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Comptroller's denial of a bank charter was unacceptable because the agency failed to state the grounds for its decision, hindering judicial review.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hardy-Herpolsheimer Div. OF Allied Stores OF Mich., Inc.
  453 F.2d 877· 6th Cir.· 1972-01-21 ·cited 6×
  The court enforced the Board's bargaining order, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's resolution of ballot challenges.
• Cheng Yih-Chun v. The Fed. Reserve Bank OF NEW York & the Sec'y of the Treas. of the United States
  442 F.2d 460· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Power of Attorney did not transfer beneficial interest and the subsequent unlicensed transfer was void, thus the assets remained blocked and plaintiff was not entitled to them or a license.
• The Church OF Scientology OF Cal. v. Elliot Richardson
  437 F.2d 214· 9th Cir.· 1971-01-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the E-meter is a misbranded device subject to import refusal under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and that its religious use does not exempt it from these regulations or violate First Amendment rights.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Manilow
  241 So. 2d 170· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-11-10 ·cited 6×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order enforcing a prior judgment, holding that amendments to a zoning ordinance made after the final judgment were void as applied to the plaintiff's property.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Lowell Corrugated Container Corp.
  431 F.2d 1196· 1st Cir.· 1970-09-30 ·cited 6×
  The court enforced the Board's order, finding that the employer's objections to the election notice and ballot were insufficient to overturn the certification.
• Orange Cnty. v. Allie
  238 So. 2d 662· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-08-31 ·cited 6×
  The Orange County Board of County Commissioners cannot refuse to appropriate funds for personnel hired by the Orange County Budget Commission, as the Commission has the sole authority to determine its staffing needs.
• United States v. Moore
  427 F.2d 1020· 10th Cir.· 1970-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the district court abused its discretion by issuing a protective order that improperly interfered with the FAA's administrative disciplinary actions against its employees, violating the principle of separation of powers.
• Reinoehl v. Hershey
  426 F.2d 815· 9th Cir.· 1970-05-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Selective Service Regulation's fee for file copies is authorized by statute and does not violate due process or equal protection.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Harry T. Campbell Sons' Corp.
  407 F.2d 969· 4th Cir.· 1969-02-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Board's designation of a bargaining unit for calcite employees was supported by substantial evidence and within its discretion, and that the employer's other contentions were without merit.
• Cmty. Television, Inc. v. United States & Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  404 F.2d 771· 10th Cir.· 1969-01-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the FCC's denial of a waiver for a CATV system to duplicate translator signals was not arbitrary and capricious, nor was it improper to deny the waiver without a hearing.
• D. Q. (Bill) Couch v. Udall
  404 F.2d 97· 10th Cir.· 1968-12-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Secretary's refusal to remove restrictions on allotted Indian land was not arbitrary or capricious, and affirmed the decision.
• Deutsch v. United States Atomic Energy Comm'n & United States
  401 F.2d 404· D.C. Cir.· 1968-08-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Atomic Energy Commission's denial of an award was not arbitrary or capricious and was supported by substantial evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. ST. Louis Printing Pressmen & Assistants Union NO. 6, Inc.
  385 F.2d 956· 8th Cir.· 1967-11-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's award of disputed work to the Typographers union was not arbitrary or capricious and is therefore enforceable.
• Meredith Broad. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  365 F.2d 912· D.C. Cir.· 1966-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the FCC's interim policy requiring hearings for certain television station acquisitions in top markets is procedural, not substantive, and thus not subject to challenge as arbitrary or unlawful at this stage.
• Norfolk Dredging Co. v. The United States
  360 F.2d 619· Ct. Cl.· 1966-05-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's use of a floating pipeline did not constitute a changed condition under the contract, as the specifications allowed for flexibility in placement methods and did not prohibit such a device. The court also found that the Board of Contract Appeals
• Walters v. The United States
  358 F.2d 957· Ct. Cl.· 1966-04-15 ·cited 6×
• United States v. Petiach
  357 F.2d 171· 7th Cir.· 1966-02-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the classification made by the Local Board had a basis in fact and the Board did not act arbitrarily in denying the defendant's claim to a ministerial exemption.
• Fla. Gulfcoast Broadcasters, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  352 F.2d 726· D.C. Cir.· 1965-10-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that issues not raised before the FCC are not properly before the reviewing court, and the FCC's findings of fact are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence.
• Silva v. Harlan B. Carter
  326 F.2d 315· 9th Cir.· 1963-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the denial of a discretionary waiver of inadmissibility was not arbitrary or capricious, even without an express ruling on all statutory eligibility requirements, and that consideration of post-hearing events was permissible.
• Attilio Zupicich v. Esperdy
  319 F.2d 773· 2d Cir.· 1963-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Attorney General's delegate's finding that the alien would not be subject to physical persecution was not arbitrary or capricious.
• William N. Feinstein & Co., Inc. v. United States & The Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  317 F.2d 509· 2d Cir.· 1963-05-21 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision upholding the Interstate Commerce Commission's determination that unloading charges for onions at Pier 17 were not unlawful.
• Sayger v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  312 F.2d 352· D.C. Cir.· 1962-12-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Commission's denial of the broadcast station application was supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious.
• Aquino v. Tobriner
  298 F.2d 674· D.C. Cir.· 1961-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Zoning Commission did not abuse its discretion in adopting zoning regulations without additional notice beyond newspaper publication, and that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate arbitrary zoning action or a vested right.
• THE Price Broadcasters, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  295 F.2d 166· D.C. Cir.· 1961-08-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Commission's decision to grant a construction permit to WGET over other applicants was supported by substantial evidence and within its discretion.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Indus. Rayon Corp.
  291 F.2d 809· 4th Cir.· 1961-06-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order requiring the employer to bargain with District 50 should not be enforced because the Board acted arbitrarily in applying its 'traditional union' test inconsistently.
• Courtaulds (Alabama) Inc. v. Dixon
  294 F.2d 899· D.C. Cir.· 1961-04-27 ·cited 6×
  The Federal Trade Commission's rule defining rayon as a manufactured fiber composed of regenerated cellulose, even if cross-linked, was not arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Convair Pomona-a Division of Convair
  286 F.2d 691· 9th Cir.· 1961-02-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's determination of an appropriate bargaining unit was arbitrary and capricious, denying enforcement of its order.
• Frano Batistic v. Alva L. Pilliod
  286 F.2d 268· 7th Cir.· 1961-01-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the administrative discretion was not exercised arbitrarily and capriciously, and the plaintiff received procedural due process.
• City OF ANN Arbor v. Nw. Park Constr. Corp.
  280 F.2d 212· 6th Cir.· 1960-06-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the rezoning ordinance was valid because the property owner did not acquire vested rights and the procedural requirements for enactment were met, despite the ordinance being passed less than thirty days after the report request.
• Mohawk Ref. Corp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  263 F.2d 818· 3d Cir.· 1959-02-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the failure to disclose that motor oil was re-refined from used oil, when sold in containers appearing to hold new oil, constituted a deceptive practice under the FTC Act, even if the re-refined oil was of equal quality.
• The Jacksonville Journal Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  246 F.2d 699· D.C. Cir.· 1957-05-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the FCC's refusal to stay or condition a VHF license grant in Jacksonville was not arbitrary or capricious, considering the public interest in prompt service.
• Charnofree Corp. v. City OF Miami Beach
  76 So. 2d 665· Fla.· 1954-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision upholding a city ordinance that restricted hotel stores on property previously subject to a favorable judicial decree. The court held that restricting the Fontainebleau Hotel from operating certain retail shops while permi
• Hawley v. Brownell
  215 F.2d 36· D.C. Cir.· 1954-04-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the suit was barred by the statute of limitations and that the denial of the claim under Section 32 was not arbitrary or capricious.