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

• 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.
• Telocator Network OF Am. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  691 F.2d 525· D.C. Cir.· 1982-10-05 ·cited 52×
  The court sustained the Federal Communications Commission's action allocating new mobile telephone channels to RCCs, allowing open entry and shared frequency use, with a modified cutoff rule for technical coordination.
• Wheeler v. City OF Pleasant Grove
  664 F.2d 99· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-18 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the city's new ordinance was an unconstitutional taking and that municipalities do not have qualified immunity in § 1983 actions.
• Nat'l Small Shipments Traffic Conf., Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  618 F.2d 819· D.C. Cir.· 1980-02-11 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) did not exceed its statutory authority in exempting air cargo carriers from tariff filing requirements, and its decision was not arbitrary and capricious.
• Pac. Legal Found. v. Dep't OF Transp.
  593 F.2d 1338· D.C. Cir.· 1979-02-01 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the Secretary of Transportation acted within his statutory authority in issuing the revised Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208, which mandates passive restraints in passenger cars.
• Empire-Detroit Steel Division v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n & Ray Marshall
  579 F.2d 378· 6th Cir.· 1978-06-22 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the employer willfully violated the Occupational Safety and Health Act's general duty clause by failing to eliminate the recognized hazard of explosions caused by molten slag and water accumulation, despite prior notice and incidents.
• Weathers v. W. Yuma Cnty. Sch. Dist. R-J-1
  530 F.2d 1335· 10th Cir.· 1976-02-25 ·cited 52×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  A nontenured teacher's nonrenewal is not a deprivation of liberty or property interests protected by the Fourteenth Amendment unless the reasons for nonrenewal impose a stigma that forecloses future employment opportunities.
• Zannino v. Arnold
  531 F.2d 687· 3d Cir.· 1976-02-19 ·cited 52×
  The court held that while the Parole Board's discretion is broad, judicial review via habeas corpus can examine whether the Board's stated reasons for denying parole have a rational factual basis in the record.
• Roark v. Boyle
  439 F.2d 497· D.C. Cir.· 1970-08-14 ·cited 52×
• Wben, Inc. v. United States & Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  396 F.2d 601· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-10 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the FCC's amended rules for presunrise operation by AM radio stations were not arbitrary or capricious, despite the difficulty in precisely quantifying listener gains and losses.
• Chatlos v. Brown
  136 F.2d 490· Emer. Ct. App.· 1943-05-28 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the Price Administrator's Maximum Rent Regulation No. 5 was not arbitrary or capricious, and the landlord failed to meet his burden of proof to establish otherwise.
• Johnson v. United States
  126 F.2d 242· 8th Cir.· 1942-03-10 ·cited 52×
  The court held that a registrant must exhaust administrative remedies, including appeal, before challenging a classification in court, and that oral testimony regarding mailing notice is admissible even if not recorded on the board's records.
• GUY v. Se. Iron Workers' Welf. Fund
  877 F.2d 37· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-11 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the Fund's decision to withhold benefits was arbitrary and capricious because the insured had not yet been made whole by the settlement, and the Fund failed to provide required notice and appeal rights.
• Dep't OF Transp. v. Groves-Watkins Constructors
  530 So. 2d 912· Fla.· 1988-08-18 ·cited 51×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Department of Transportation lawfully rejected all bids on a highway construction project as too high and properly ordered a rebid, establishing that agencies have broad discretion to reject all bids absent fraud, illegality, or bad faith,
• Littlefield v. City OF Afton
  785 F.2d 596· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-03 ·cited 51×
  The court held that appellants had a protected property interest in the building permit under Minnesota law, and thus were entitled to procedural due process. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of the procedural due process claim as appellants received adequate notice and
• Fine v. Semet
  699 F.2d 1091· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-11 ·cited 51×
  The court should have remanded the case because the district court's conclusion regarding the investment impact of the lump sum distribution was not supported by sufficient evidence, particularly expert testimony.
• Mont. Power Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  608 F.2d 334· 9th Cir.· 1979-07-16 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the EPA's interpretation of 'commenced construction' under the Clean Air Act regulations and amendments was reasonable and not arbitrary or capricious, reversing the district court's judgment.
• E. Oakland-Fruitvale Planning Council v. Rumsfeld
  471 F.2d 524· 9th Cir.· 1972-12-08 ·cited 51×
  The court held that while the Director's ultimate decision on whether to override a governor's veto is unreviewable due to broad discretion, the Director has a statutory obligation to reconsider vetoed grants, and procedural claims related to hearings and findings are judicially
• Hozier v. Midwest Fasteners, Inc.
  908 F.2d 1155· 3d Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 50×
  The court held that ERISA prohibits oral amendments to employee benefit plans, and that decisions to amend or terminate a plan are not fiduciary acts. However, the court found ambiguity in the original plan's terms, requiring further factual determination.
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency & Lee M. Thomas
  824 F.2d 1146· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-28 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the Administrator has discretion under section 112 of the Clean Air Act to set emission standards for hazardous pollutants, and is not required to prohibit all emissions when a safe threshold cannot be determined, nor is he prohibited from considering cost and
• Walter O. Boswell Mem'l Hosp. v. Heckler
  749 F.2d 788· D.C. Cir.· 1984-11-30 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the District Court erred by reviewing the case without the full administrative record, and remanded for consideration of the complete record and proper application of APA and Medicare Act standards.
• Emil F. Goldhaber v. Foley
  698 F.2d 193· 3d Cir.· 1983-01-17 ·cited 50×
  The government's position in the entire proceedings was substantially justified, despite losing on one issue.
• Smith v. Hussmann Refrigerator Co. & Local 13889
  619 F.2d 1229· 8th Cir.· 1980-01-21 ·cited 50×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that a union's subsequent collaboration with an employer to modify a prior arbitration award, without notice to affected junior employees, constituted a breach of the union's duty of fair representation and a breach of the collective bargaining agreement by the com
• YEE v. The United States
  512 F.2d 1383· Ct. Cl.· 1975-03-19 ·cited 50×
  The Air Force Board for the Correction of Military Records' denial of relief was arbitrary and capricious, entitling the plaintiff to back pay and record correction, but the offset of civilian earnings was proper.
• Buhr v. Buffalo Pub. Sch. Dist. NO. 38
  509 F.2d 1196· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 50×
  A non-tenured public school teacher's termination does not violate due process unless it deprives them of a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest.
• Secretary OF Labor OF the United States v. Farino
  490 F.2d 885· 7th Cir.· 1973-12-19 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the denial of alien employment certifications is subject to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act and that employers have standing to challenge these denials. However, the court reversed the district court's order to issue certifications, rema
• McDONNELL v. Wolff
  483 F.2d 1059· 8th Cir.· 1973-08-02 ·cited 50×
• The Fort Worth Nat'l Corp. v. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp.
  469 F.2d 47· 5th Cir.· 1972-10-12 ·cited 50×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to issue a preliminary injunction when a statutory review procedure in the Court of Appeals was available and adequate. The FSLIC's disapproval of FWN's acquisition was proper under the National Housing Act's anticompetitive provisions.
• Constructores Civiles de Centroamerica v. Hannah
  459 F.2d 1183· D.C. Cir.· 1972-03-14 ·cited 50×
  A non-resident alien corporation has standing to challenge an agency's contract award decision under the Administrative Procedure Act, and sovereign immunity is waived by the Act's provision for judicial review.
• Webster Groves Tr. Co. v. Saxon
  370 F.2d 381· 8th Cir.· 1966-12-14 ·cited 50×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that while competing banks have standing to challenge illegal acts of the Comptroller, neither the National Banking Act nor the Administrative Procedure Act requires a formal adversary hearing for the processing of a national bank charter application.
• Ill. Packing Co. v. Snyder
  151 F.2d 337· Emer. Ct. App.· 1945-09-25 ·cited 50×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to hear the complaint challenging the validity of the subsidy regulation provisions, denying the motion to dismiss.
• Lightbourne v. Dugger
  549 So. 2d 1364· Fla.· 1989-07-20 ·cited 49×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Sentencing
  Ian Lightbourne appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief and habeas corpus petition in a capital murder case. The Florida Supreme Court reverses in part, finding that allegations of Brady violations regarding cellmate testimony warrant an evidentiary hearing, bu
• Schaper v. City OF Huntsville
  813 F.2d 709· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 49×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that allegations of bias and conspiracy in pre-termination hearings, even if true, do not state a procedural or substantive due process claim when a post-termination administrative remedy is available.
• Nance v. Env't Prot. Agency
  645 F.2d 701· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-18 ·cited 49×
  The court should not decide the case because it is not ripe for judicial review.
• Refrigerated Transp. Co., Inc. v. The Interstate Commerce Comm'n & the United States
  616 F.2d 748· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-05 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the ICC's grant of operating authority to Belford Trucking between Jacksonville and Plant City, Florida, was supported by substantial evidence, but the grant of statewide authority was not.
• Kollett v. Harris
  619 F.2d 134· 1st Cir.· 1980-04-18 ·cited 49×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A))
• Wood-Hopkins Contracting Co. v. Roger J. AU & SON, Inc.
  354 So. 2d 446· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-01-26 ·cited 49×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  Wood-Hopkins Contracting Company and Jacksonville Electric Authority appealed trial court judgments that enjoined JEA from awarding a thermal discharge unit construction contract to Wood-Hopkins and mandated award to the lowest bidder, Roger J. Au & Son, Inc. The appellate court
• Int'l Eng'g Co. v. Elliott L. Richardson
  512 F.2d 573· D.C. Cir.· 1975-05-02 ·cited 49×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the dispute was a contract action falling under the Tucker Act, not agency action reviewable under the APA, and thus the injunction was improper.
• Sierra Club v. Lynn
  502 F.2d 43· 5th Cir.· 1974-10-04 ·cited 49×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision on the merits regarding HUD's compliance with NEPA and Title VII, but reversed the award of attorneys' fees and the retention of jurisdiction.
• Briscoe v. Kusper
  435 F.2d 1046· 7th Cir.· 1970-12-22 ·cited 49×
• Maryland People's Counsel v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  761 F.2d 768· D.C. Cir.· 1985-05-10 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to provide a reasonable basis for its limitation on eligible purchasers of released natural gas under a special marketing program (SMP), specifically excluding captive customers.
• Nat'l Ass'n FOR the Advancement OF Colored People v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  682 F.2d 993· D.C. Cir.· 1982-06-29 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Federal Communication Commission's repeal of the Top-Fifty Policy, which required evidentiary hearings for certain television ownership applications in major markets, was a rational and permissible administrative action.
• Cent. Freight Lines, Inc. v. The United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  669 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission did not err in applying the Motor Carrier Act of 1980 to pending applications and that its hybrid hearing procedure did not violate due process.
• Nat'l Ass'n OF Food Chains, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  535 F.2d 1308· D.C. Cir.· 1976-05-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's order on reconsideration, which reversed its prior decision and allowed motor carriers to eliminate unloading services for loose and carcass meats, lacked a rational basis and was not adequately supported by the record.
• Sabin v. Butz
  515 F.2d 1061· 10th Cir.· 1975-04-09 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Forest Service's denial of a ski instructor permit was not arbitrary or capricious on its face, but that summary judgment was improper because the agency failed to consider relevant antitrust and anti-competitive factors raised by the applicant.
• Cross v. United States
  512 F.2d 1212· 4th Cir.· 1975-02-07 ·cited 48×
  The court held that a plaintiff who admits to violations of an act waives their right to a de novo hearing on the fact of the violation and any accompanying due process rights. The scope of judicial review over administrative sanctions is limited to whether the sanction is arbitr
• Int'l Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Mediation Bd.
  425 F.2d 527· D.C. Cir.· 1970-01-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that while the Railway Labor Act's mediation process is generally shielded from judicial review, courts retain jurisdiction to review claims of patently arbitrary or unreasonably delayed agency action, particularly when constitutional questions arise.
• Thompson Ramo Wooldridge Inc. v. The United States
  361 F.2d 222· Ct. Cl.· 1966-05-13 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the contract's provisions could be harmonized to allow the warranty of suitability for Government-furnished property to retain meaning, and that making usable prints was an intended use for the microfilm in a manufacturing context.
• Glesby L. Dabney v. Freeman
  358 F.2d 533· D.C. Cir.· 1965-12-28 ·cited 48×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Standard Of Review
  The court should not affirm summary judgment for appellees without knowing the basis for the trial court's decision, especially when a genuine issue of material fact regarding coercion exists.
• Manning v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  324 F.2d 857· 5th Cir.· 1963-11-27 ·cited 48×·via Arbitrary And Capricious Action
  The court held that the Regional Director's determination of election objections was final and binding, and the election results were valid despite alleged threats.