Arbitrary, Capricious, Or Abuse Of Discretion Standard

57 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Save OUR TEN Acres v. Rod Kreger
  472 F.2d 463· 5th Cir.· 1973-01-16 ·cited 93×
  The court held that the agency's threshold determination not to file an Environmental Impact Statement under NEPA should be reviewed under a more searching standard than arbitrary and capricious, requiring a determination of whether the project would materially degrade environmen
• Am. Petroleum Inst. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  540 F.2d 1023· 10th Cir.· 1976-08-11 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the Administrator had the authority to promulgate effluent limitations for existing sources and that the use of single numbers in these regulations was permissible. The 1977 variance provisions were also upheld as a valid exercise of rulemaking authority.
• Charlton v. United States & John W. Macy, Jr.
  412 F.2d 390· 3d Cir.· 1969-06-02 ·cited 54×
  The concurring judge agrees that the case must be remanded due to the district court's narrow scope of review but disagrees with the majority's inclusion of the substantial evidence test for reviewing government employee discharges.
• Sierra Club v. Peterson
  717 F.2d 1409· D.C. Cir.· 1983-09-13 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the Forest Service's decision to issue oil and gas leases without preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on lands without a No Surface Occupancy Stipulation violated NEPA because the Department could not preclude surface-disturbing activities at the
• In re Lucian G. Vorpahl
  695 F.2d 318· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-17 ·cited 38×
  Petitioners are not entitled to a jury trial for claims seeking present and future pension benefits under ERISA, as such claims are equitable in nature.
• Nat'l Helium Corp. v. Rogers C. B. Morton
  486 F.2d 995· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-19 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the Secretary's Final Environmental Statement (FES) was adequate under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and that the district court erred in enjoining the termination of helium purchase contracts.
• Saavedra v. Donovan
  700 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1983-02-04 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor's decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law, and was supported by substantial evidence, affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment.
• Sierra Club v. The United States Dep't OF Transp.
  753 F.2d 120· D.C. Cir.· 1985-01-25 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the FAA did not violate NEPA by failing to prepare a new EIS and did not violate the Transportation Code by permitting B-737 operations at Jackson Hole Airport.
• 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.
• La. Env't Soc'y, Inc. v. Dole
  707 F.2d 116· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the administrative record adequately supported the Administrator's Section 4(f) determination that the proposed bridge route minimized harm to recreational areas, and that the district court erred in striking new causes of action from the plaintiffs' supplemen
• MacKowiak v. Univ. Nuclear Sys., Inc.
  735 F.2d 1159· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor erred in applying the dual motive analysis and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine if the employer would have terminated the employee even without the protected conduct.
• Charlotte Diane Edwards for Debora A. Long and Clayton D. Long v. Califano
  619 F.2d 865· 10th Cir.· 1980-04-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the claimant established that the wage earner was "unexplainedly absent" under the regulation, triggering a presumption of death, and the Secretary failed to rebut this presumption.
• Albert v. Honorable John Chafee
  571 F.2d 1063· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-29 ·cited 20×
• Pabst Brewing Co. v. Anger
  784 F.2d 338· 8th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the former employees did not suffer a "layoff" as defined by the Separation From Employment Policy when the brewery was transferred, and thus Pabst did not owe them severance pay.
• Monroe Cnty. Conservation Council, Inc. v. Brock Adams
  566 F.2d 419· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Section 4(f) Statement adequately considered alternatives and social impacts, and the district court did not err in finding compliance with statutory requirements.
• Elinor R. Bacon v. Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  757 F.2d 265· Fed. Cir.· 1985-03-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the agency's stated reason for the reduction-in-force (RIF), 'workload and skills imbalances,' was a proper basis under the applicable regulation, and that the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) did not err in its decision.
• McDONOUGH v. United States Postal Serv.
  666 F.2d 647· 1st Cir.· 1981-11-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision to uphold the petitioner's removal from the Postal Service was reasonable and supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
• Castillo-Rodriguez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  929 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals' final order, even if the petition for review technically designates the immigration judge's order, and that substantial evidence supported the Board's denial of asylum.
• Distrigas OF Mass. Corp. & Distrigas Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  737 F.2d 1208· 1st Cir.· 1984-06-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Commission's decision to deduct deferred tax liabilities from DOMAC's rate base was arbitrary and unjustified, but affirmed the Commission's decision regarding who should bear the cost of those liabilities.
• Woods v. United States
  681 F.2d 988· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Coast Guard's admonishment of a vessel operator for negligence was proper, as the operator failed to overcome the presumption of fault arising from a collision with a fixed object.
• Richey Manor, Inc. v. Schweiker
  684 F.2d 130· D.C. Cir.· 1982-07-30 ·cited 14×
  A stock purchase followed by conversion to a not-for-profit corporation does not entitle the provider to a stepped-up basis for depreciation or reimbursement for interest expenses incurred by the purchaser.
• Summers v. The United States
  648 F.2d 1324· Ct. Cl.· 1981-05-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to premium overtime pay for periods where he was subjected to unjustified or unwarranted personnel actions, including improper reassignments and suspensions, as these actions violated procedural requirements and entitled him to back
• Nat'l Fed'n OF Fed. Emps. & Nat'l Ass'n of Gov't Emps. v. Devine
  671 F.2d 607· D.C. Cir.· 1982-02-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had good cause to postpone the federal employees' health benefit open season without prior notice and comment under the Administrative Procedure Act due to unforeseen emergency circumstances.
• CF&I Steel Corp. v. Econ. Dev. Admin.
  624 F.2d 136· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Economic Development Administration's (EDA) approval of a loan guarantee for Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel was rational and supported by the administrative record, and that the trial court did not err in its review.
• Albert v. Hon. John H. Chafee
  465 F.2d 367· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that jurisdiction exists under the Administrative Procedure Act to review the dismissal of a civilian employee of the Department of the Navy.
• The Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. The Agric. Stabilization & Conservation Serv.
  955 F.2d 1199· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-05 ·cited 8×
  The court vacated the district court's judgment and remanded the case because subsequent amendments to the relevant statutes provided for a good-faith exemption and graduated sanctions, which required reconsideration by the Secretary of Agriculture.
• Shoals Am. Indus., Inc. v. The United States
  877 F.2d 883· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to accord sufficient deference to the GAO's reasonable interpretation of procurement statutes and regulations when reviewing the agency's decision.
• Lockert v. United States Dep't OF Labor
  867 F.2d 513· 9th Cir.· 1989-01-30 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the Secretary of Labor's decision, holding that the employee's termination was not in violation of the Energy Reorganization Act's whistleblower protections.
• Univ. OF Cincinnati v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  809 F.2d 307· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 8×
• Mass. Dep't OF Corr. v. LAW Enf't Assistance Admin.
  605 F.2d 21· 1st Cir.· 1979-09-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration's (LEAA) denial of a discretionary grant to the Massachusetts Department of Correction (MDOC) was supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious, despite some procedural irregularities in the rev
• Martinez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  970 F.2d 973· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in denying a waiver of deportation, as its decision was rational and based on the petitioner's significant criminal history.
• Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Manual Lujan
  951 F.2d 257· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior has the authority to order a lessee to provide records for an audit, even if those records pertain to a period outside the general statute of limitations for collecting royalties.
• Dep't OF Labor v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n
  938 F.2d 1116· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to meet its burden of proving Goltra had actual or constructive knowledge of a reasonable probability of injury that could be prevented by face shields.
• Boston Edison Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  885 F.2d 962· 1st Cir.· 1989-09-14 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's orders setting electricity rates, finding that FERC acted within its legal power and discretion in determining the rate of return and cost recovery.
• People OF the State OF Ill. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  668 F.2d 923· 7th Cir.· 1981-10-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's decision to permit abandonment of a railroad line was not erroneous as a matter of law, as the merger conditions did not legally prohibit abandonment and the ICC's factual findings were supported by substantial evidence.
• Miss. Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  650 F.2d 551· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-25 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the ICC's order allowing abandonment, finding it supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious.
• Pre-Fab Transit Co. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  595 F.2d 384· 7th Cir.· 1979-03-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the ICC's denial of Pre-Fab's application was supported by substantial evidence and was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, even if it arguably departed from prior precedent.
• Hyundai Elecs. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n
  899 F.2d 1204· Fed. Cir.· 1990-04-04 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the International Trade Commission's exclusion order, holding that the certification provision for downstream products was a reasonable remedy within the Commission's discretion.
• Nat'l Treas. Emps. Union v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth.
  802 F.2d 843· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Labor Relations Authority's denial of backpay was not adequately explained and remanded the case for further consideration.
• Cent. Hardware Co. v. Central States
  770 F.2d 106· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-08 ·cited 4×
  A multi-employer pension fund has the authority under its governing documents to reject employer payments that threaten its actuarial soundness, and such a decision, made in good faith, is binding.
• State OF Ohio v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  761 F.2d 1187· 6th Cir.· 1985-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Secretary's disapproval of Ohio's Medicaid plan amendment was not supported by substantial evidence and vacated the decision, remanding for further proceedings to allow Ohio to demonstrate that its proposed services fall within the definition of 'medical a
• Schicke v. Romney
  474 F.2d 309· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-20 ·cited 4×
  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.
• Morales v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd.
  932 F.2d 800· 9th Cir.· 1991-05-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the retaliatory discharge claim because a genuine issue of material fact regarding credibility remained, but affirmed summary judgment on the non-discrimination claims.
• State OF Cal. v. Bennett
  849 F.2d 1227· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Secretary lacked good cause to disallow field trip expenditures and that the disallowance of multi-purpose conference expenses was proper, while remanding for further determination on lodging expenses.
• Colo. Dep't OF Soc. Servs. v. The Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  771 F.2d 1422· 10th Cir.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Department of Health and Human Services Departmental Grant Appeals Board acted within its authority by imposing a 12-month time limit on continued federal funding during state administrative and judicial review of decertification decisions.
• Medina Ferrer v. Fatica
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-10-25
  The court held that the denial of the plaintiff's motion to reopen or reconsider his adjustment of status application was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion because he willfully misrepresented material facts regarding his arrests.
• Coastal Conservation Ass'n v. Gutierrez
  417 F. Supp. 2d 1304· M.D. Fla.· 2006-02-28
  The court held that while plaintiffs were prevailing parties, the government's position was substantially justified, thus denying EAJA fees, but awarded limited costs for filing fees.
• JAY v. Sec'y OF the Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  998 F.2d 979· Fed. Cir.· 1993-07-13
  The court held that the special master erred in granting summary judgment for HHS and denying it for the petitioners, as the undisputed evidence established an encephalopathy and vaccine causation as a matter of law.
• Williams v. Rice
  983 F.2d 177· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-04
  The court held that summary judgment for the employer was proper because the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for his discrimination claim and did not establish a prima facie case of retaliation.
• Babakitis v. Off. OF Pers. Mgmt.
  978 F.2d 693· Fed. Cir.· 1992-10-28
  The court held that the petitioner's civil service retirement annuity properly included his initial military service credit because his military disability pension was not based on that period of service, thus no overpayment occurred.