Mandamus Jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1361)

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

• Reynaldo Tongol v. Usery
  601 F.2d 1091· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the federal regulation prohibiting states from waiving recoupment of overpayments was invalid as exceeding the Secretary's statutory authority and conflicting with congressional intent to apply state law. The court also held that plaintiffs stated a claim unde
• Grant v. Hogan
  505 F.2d 1220· 3d Cir.· 1974-11-20 ·cited 22×
  A federal prisoner must first pursue remedies under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers before seeking relief from a state detainer in federal court.
• Captain Douglas Bruce McGAW v. Colonel A. Allen Farrow
  472 F.2d 952· 4th Cir.· 1973-01-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of federal question jurisdiction and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Payne Enters., Inc. v. United States
  837 F.2d 486· D.C. Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 20×
• Lugo v. Schweiker
  776 F.2d 1143· 3d Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 20×
  The Secretary's "netting" regulations, which allow recovery of overpayments without a waiver hearing, are inconsistent with statutory provisions and Supreme Court precedent requiring such hearings.
• Luella H. Mills v. Elliot L. Richardson
  464 F.2d 995· 2d Cir.· 1972-07-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the case was not moot due to the government's stated intention to commence recoupment after appeal, and vacated the dismissal, remanding for further proceedings.
• Linquist v. Bowen
  813 F.2d 884· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the Social Security Administration and Railroad Retirement Board must coordinate their application of the excess earnings deduction, ensuring that dual beneficiaries do not have more than fifty percent of their excess earnings recouped in total.
• Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti
  503 F. Supp. 442· S.D. Fla.· 1980-07-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court has jurisdiction to review claims alleging procedural irregularities in the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) processing of asylum claims, distinguishing these from direct challenges to final deportation orders which are exclusi
• Einhorn v. DeWITT
  618 F.2d 347· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-04 ·cited 19×
  The court held that 26 C.F.R. § 601.107(b)(2) grants discretion to the IRS regarding disclosure of information in criminal investigations, and therefore, federal courts lack jurisdiction to compel such disclosure.
• Williams v. Secretary OF the Navy
  787 F.2d 552· Fed. Cir.· 1986-03-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint on the merits and should have dismissed it for failure to exhaust remedies available within the military.
• Dominique Dubost v. U.S. Patent & Trademark Off.
  777 F.2d 1561· Fed. Cir.· 1985-11-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that an unsigned check, if honored by the bank, can satisfy the requirement that a patent application be accompanied by the filing fee, allowing for the earlier filing date.
• Hyatt v. Heckler
  757 F.2d 1455· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 18×
  The Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984 and Supreme Court precedent require vacating the district court's injunction and class certification, and remanding the case for reconsideration of disability benefit claims.
• Starnes v. Schweiker
  715 F.2d 134· 4th Cir.· 1983-08-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction under both 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (mandamus) to review the Secretary's procedural challenges to Medicare benefit level determinations. It affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction
• Murray v. United States
  686 F.2d 1320· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the United States had not waived sovereign immunity for the claims presented.
• Susan and Andrew Giza v. Secretary OF Health
  628 F.2d 748· 1st Cir.· 1980-09-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to compel the FDA to make an expert employee available for deposition testimony in a private state court lawsuit.
• King v. Honorable Rogers C. B. Morton
  520 F.2d 1140· D.C. Cir.· 1975-10-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the constitutional right to a jury trial in serious criminal offenses applies to American Samoa, and jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1361.
• Miller v. Captain Carl Ackerman
  488 F.2d 920· 8th Cir.· 1973-12-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Marine Corps' prohibition on reservists wearing short-hair wigs to comply with grooming standards lacked a rational basis and was an unjustified infringement on personal liberty.
• S. Ohio Coal Co. v. Donovan
  774 F.2d 693· 6th Cir.· 1985-10-02 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district courts had jurisdiction to hear the operators' constitutional due process claims challenging the Mine Commission's Rule 44, and that the claims were not mooted by settlements with miners, nor barred by failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Vishnevsky v. United States
  581 F.2d 1249· 7th Cir.· 1978-08-09 ·cited 17×
• Sharp v. Caspar Weinberger
  798 F.2d 1521· D.C. Cir.· 1986-08-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court's jurisdiction was not based on the Little Tucker Act, as the appellant's claims for equitable relief were properly grounded in the Administrative Procedure Act, and claims for contract breach seek
• Hopewell Nursing Home v. Schweiker
  666 F.2d 34· 4th Cir.· 1981-11-30 ·cited 16×
• Mower v. Britton
  504 F.2d 396· 10th Cir.· 1974-09-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Administrative Procedure Act requires the Parole Board to provide a brief statement of reasons for denying parole, and that the district court erred in dismissing the prisoners' claims.
• Pescosolido v. Block
  765 F.2d 827· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-09 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the plaintiff-producers lacked standing to seek judicial review of the Secretary's marketing order because the relief sought could not cure their alleged injury.
• Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Donovan
  713 F.2d 1243· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-12 ·cited 14×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to grant declaratory and injunctive relief against the Secretary of Labor regarding the Black Lung Benefits Act's application to railroads.
• Gilman J. Chasse v. Chasen
  595 F.2d 59· 1st Cir.· 1979-03-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Circular INS-2MI is not a law or regulation, and plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
• Donovan v. United States
  580 F.2d 1203· 3d Cir.· 1978-07-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Federal Back Pay Act, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, does not permit recovery for the wrongful denial of promotion, but equitable relief regarding seniority credit may be available.
• WAN Shih Hsieh v. Kiley
  569 F.2d 1179· 2d Cir.· 1978-01-12 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review consular visa decisions and that the INS has no duty to investigate potential fraud in an alien's status beyond processing preference petitions.
• Venus Mandley v. Trainor
  523 F.2d 415· 7th Cir.· 1975-09-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Illinois emergency assistance program unlawfully narrowed eligibility criteria beyond what is permitted by Section 406(e) of the Social Security Act, violating federal law.
• Hi-Ridge Lumber Co. v. United States
  443 F.2d 452· 9th Cir.· 1971-05-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Forest Service's decision to reject all bids for a timber sale was committed to agency discretion by law and therefore not subject to judicial review on the merits. The court also found that the second highest bidder had standing to appeal the initial deci
• Walden v. Bartlett
  840 F.2d 771· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-01 ·cited 12×
  The Feres doctrine bars damage claims by military personnel for injuries incident to service, but does not bar claims for injunctive or declaratory relief.
• Millard Griffith v. Bell-Whitley Cmty. Action Agency
  614 F.2d 1102· 6th Cir.· 1980-01-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the district court had jurisdiction over the constitutional claims, the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the community action agency's actions did not constitute federal action. The court affirmed the dismissa
• Morgan v. Melchar
  442 F.2d 1082· 3d Cir.· 1971-05-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as pre-induction judicial review of Selective Service classifications is generally barred by statute.
• Homewood Prof'l Care Ctr., Ltd. v. Heckler
  764 F.2d 1242· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-12 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed Homewood's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Homewood failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 405(h).
• Woodard v. Marsh
  658 F.2d 989· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the plaintiff's equal protection claim regarding his discharge from the Army Reserve was not reviewable due to the significant interference it would cause with military functions and expertise. The court also found no genuine issue of material fact regarding t
• Greater LOS Angeles Council ON Deafness, Inc. v. Baldrige
  827 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the claim for failure to act on the administrative complaint and that mandamus is available to compel the Department to act, but affirmed the refusal to issue a declaratory judgment.
• In re Sebben v. Brock
  815 F.2d 475· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court had mandamus jurisdiction to compel the Secretary of Labor to reopen and reconsider claims for black lung benefits that were denied under an improper regulatory standard, despite the expiration of administrative and judicial appeal periods.
• Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Comm'n OF the Supreme Court OF Ill. v. Schweiker
  715 F.2d 282· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-11 ·cited 10×
  The Seventh Circuit held that the Disciplinary Commission, as an entity that paid social security taxes and has a direct interest in its employees' coverage, can sue under section 205(g) of the Social Security Act for a determination of coverage, even though it is not an 'individ
• Smith v. Schweiker
  709 F.2d 777· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' claim because they have not exhausted their administrative remedies as required by the Social Security Act.
• Jarecki v. United States
  590 F.2d 670· 7th Cir.· 1979-01-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the GSA's creation of the FPS was within its statutory authority and that plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies for reclassification claims.
• Concerned Citizens OF Bushkill Twp. v. Costle
  592 F.2d 164· 3d Cir.· 1979-01-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a continuance for the EPA to reconsider its prior approval of a sewer project and prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
• Winningham v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  512 F.2d 617· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1337 and that the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, as applied to the plaintiff, did not violate the Equal Protection or Due Process clauses of the Fifth Amendment.
• Rincon Band OF Mission Indians v. Escondido Mut. Water Co.
  459 F.2d 1082· 9th Cir.· 1972-04-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Attorney General is not required to provide legal representation or security to the plaintiffs due to a conflict of interest, and the appealability of the order is proper under the collateral order doctrine.
• Skolnick v. Commissioner James Benton Parsons
  397 F.2d 523· 7th Cir.· 1968-07-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff's lawsuit abated because the defendant Commission's legal existence terminated before the complaint was filed, and the Commission was not a suable entity.
• MacZko v. Joyce
  814 F.2d 308· 6th Cir.· 1987-03-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a disputed or unliquidated claim for backpay does not constitute a 'duty owed' to the plaintiff for purposes of establishing subject matter jurisdiction under the Mandamus Act (28 U.S.C. § 1361).
• Matthews v. United States
  810 F.2d 109· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because exclusive jurisdiction over the controllers' claim for reinstatement and back pay is vested in the United States Claims Court under the Tucker Act.
• Ila P. Bisson v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  787 F.2d 181· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's claims arose under the Social Security Act and she had not exhausted administrative remedies after the Appeals Council reopened her case.
• Hatcher v. Heckler
  772 F.2d 427· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-04 ·cited 8×
  The federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to hear claims challenging Part B Medicare benefit determinations, even if framed as due process violations, due to statutory preclusion under 42 U.S.C. § 405(h).
• Smith v. N. La. Med. Review Ass'n
  735 F.2d 168· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to establish a constitutionally protected property interest in the Waiver of Liability (WOL) presumption and that the NLMRA, as a federal entity, could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for state action.
• Mercer v. Birchman
  700 F.2d 828· 2d Cir.· 1983-02-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies and that their claims did not warrant mandamus jurisdiction because the administrative process ultimately corrected the alleged procedural errors.
• Herzog v. Secretary OF Health
  686 F.2d 1154· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-09 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the action, holding that the constitutional claims raised by the appellants were too insubstantial to establish federal question jurisdiction.