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

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

• Smith v. Fletcher
  559 F.2d 1014· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's finding of sex discrimination was not clearly erroneous and affirmed the award of retroactive promotion, back pay, and attorney's fees.
• Naporano Metal & Iron Co. v. Secretary OF Labor OF the United States and Robert Seebol
  529 F.2d 537· 3d Cir.· 1976-01-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a wage established under a collective bargaining agreement and paid equally to alien and non-alien workers cannot be deemed to adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed Americans. Therefore, the Secretary of Labor acted contrary t
• Howard v. Hodgson
  490 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1974-01-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Secretary of Labor has discretion not to file suit to set aside a union election if he finds no probable cause to believe that violations may have affected the election's outcome.
• Barr v. United States
  478 F.2d 1152· 10th Cir.· 1973-04-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the claims against all defendants, affirming the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Casarino v. United States
  431 F.2d 775· 2d Cir.· 1970-09-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Air Force's Berry Plan did not contractually obligate it to assign a physician to his chosen specialty, and that the needs of the service could override deferment agreements.
• Grinberg v. Swacina
  478 F. Supp. 2d 1350· S.D. Fla.· 2007-03-20 ·cited 7×
  The court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to compel adjudication of immigration status adjustment applications due to statutory preclusion of review for discretionary agency actions, including the pace of processing.
• Silebi De Donado v. Swacina
  486 F. Supp. 2d 1360· S.D. Fla.· 2007-05-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the 120-day period for adjudicating a naturalization application under 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b) begins on the date of the applicant's initial interview, not upon completion of background checks.
• MacOn v. Sullivan
  929 F.2d 1524· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) because the Appeals Council's reexamination of the case constituted a reopening on the merits.
• Hamilton Stores, Inc. v. Hodel
  925 F.2d 1272· 10th Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court had federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and that summary judgment for the government was appropriate because the services awarded to TWS were not 'new or additional' and thus did not trigger HSI's preferential right.
• Darrell Bedoni and his parents Sidney Bedoni and Lena Bedoni v. Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation Comm'n
  854 F.2d 321· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiffs' claims for replacement housing benefits exceeded $10,000, placing them within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Claims.
• McCLAIN v. Panama Canal Comm'n
  834 F.2d 452· 5th Cir.· 1987-12-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Panama Canal Commission lacked subject matter jurisdiction over personal injury claims exceeding $50,000, and therefore, the district court correctly granted summary judgment.
• Luster Slone v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  825 F.2d 1081· 6th Cir.· 1987-08-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a mandamus petition seeking reinstatement of Social Security benefits is essentially a claim for benefits and is therefore subject to the exhaustion requirements and time limits of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
• Garland v. Sullivan
  737 F.2d 1283· 3d Cir.· 1984-06-27 ·cited 6×
• Gnagy v. The United States
  634 F.2d 574· Ct. Cl.· 1980-10-22 ·cited 6×
  A military member of the National Guard, when not in active federal service, is a state employee, not a federal employee, for purposes of the Back Pay Act.
• Toles v. Hon. Nicholas Katzenbach
  385 F.2d 107· 9th Cir.· 1967-09-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in not conducting a plenary hearing to determine if the prison's cell assignment practices were justified by pressing public necessity.
• Panko v. Rodak
  606 F.2d 168· 7th Cir.· 1979-08-01 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a clear right to have his non-compliant Supreme Court filings accepted or a duty on the part of the clerks to accept them, and that the clerks were immune from damage claims.
• Eldeeb v. Chertoff
  619 F. Supp. 2d 1190· M.D. Fla.· 2007-07-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jurisdictional bar under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not preclude review of the agency's alleged unreasonable delay in adjudicating an I-485 application, as such delay may render the decision non-discretionary.
• Bobula v. United States Dep't OF Just.
  970 F.2d 854· Fed. Cir.· 1992-07-14 ·cited 4×
  Ms. Bobula's remedy, if any, lies within the Civil Service Reform Act or internal grievance procedures, not direct judicial enforcement of her settlement agreement.
• Brimer v. Levi
  555 F.2d 656· 8th Cir.· 1977-05-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while venue was improper in the Western District of Missouri, the case should be transferred to the District of Columbia rather than dismissed.
• Ellis v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  551 F.2d 13· 3d Cir.· 1977-02-24 ·cited 4×
  Tenants of non-subsidized § 220 housing are not entitled to a hearing prior to HUD approval of a rental increase requested by their landlord.
• Econ. Opportunity Comm'n OF Nassau Cnty., Inc. v. Casper Weinberger
  524 F.2d 393· 2d Cir.· 1975-08-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the administrative proceedings were not a nullity despite HEW's failure to formally prescribe procedures, as NCEOC was not prejudiced and received adequate notice and opportunity to be heard. The court also affirmed HEW's authority to directly fund GCD.
• Crow v. Kelley
  512 F.2d 752· 8th Cir.· 1975-03-14 ·cited 4×
  A federal court lacks jurisdiction to order the FBI to expunge records of arrests and convictions without the petitioner first exhausting remedies with the state or local authorities responsible for those records.
• Slater Williams v. Froehlke
  490 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1974-01-14 ·cited 4×
  A court-martial has jurisdiction to try a serviceman for a non-service-connected offense committed in a foreign country, even if O'Callahan v. Parker would limit such jurisdiction for offenses committed within U.S. territorial limits.
• Bailey v. Tarr
  469 F.2d 409· 9th Cir.· 1972-11-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the 1971 amendments to the Military Selective Service Act did not create a new 90-day moratorium on inductions, and therefore, induction orders issued during that period were not void.
• Strople v. Local Bd. NO. 60 & Local Bd. No. 3
  466 F.2d 601· 3d Cir.· 1972-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a registrant deprived of administrative appeal rights by a local board's refusal to reopen his classification is entitled to pre-induction judicial review.
• Fass v. Ruegg
  379 F.2d 216· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the administrative proceedings for the plaintiff's dismissal substantially complied with applicable procedures and statutes, and therefore, the district court's grant of summary judgment was correct.
• Montres Rolex, S.A. v. Snyder
  718 F.2d 524· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-14 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the definition of a 'counterfeit' trademark under 19 U.S.C. § 1526(e) should be applied from the standpoint of an average purchaser, and the comparison should be made with the mark on actual merchandise, not just the registration certificate.
• Council OF & FOR THE Blind OF Del. Cnty. Valley, Inc. v. Regan
  709 F.2d 1521· D.C. Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 3×
  The court held that neither the Revenue Sharing Act nor the APA authorizes a private cause of action against the Office of Revenue Sharing (ORS) for failing to adequately enforce nondiscrimination provisions, as Congress intended private suits to target recipients, not the agency
• Grp. Health Inc. v. Schweiker
  549 F. Supp. 135· S.D. Fla.· 1982-09-23 ·cited 3×
  The court dismissed the action without prejudice, finding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and that plaintiffs failed to meet the criteria for a preliminary injunction.
• Anderson v. Bowen
  881 F.2d 1· 2d Cir.· 1989-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to review Medicare Part B benefit amount determinations, and that neither a substantial constitutional claim nor mandamus jurisdiction was established.
• Kurlan v. Callaway
  510 F.2d 274· 2d Cir.· 1974-12-27 ·cited 2×
  National Guard members who qualified for transfer to the Standby Reserve before July 10, 1974, and applied before that date, are entitled to transfer, even if the Governor later modified consent.
• Skolnick v. Chief Judge William J. Campbell
  454 F.2d 531· 7th Cir.· 1971-11-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the suit against the Commission abated upon its dissolution and that the judge is immune from civil liability for actions taken within his jurisdiction.
• Davies v. Resor
  445 F.2d 1331· 1st Cir.· 1971-07-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant further relief because the appellant did not allege or prove a violation of constitutional rights in his original court-martial conviction.
• Drake v. Selective Serv. Local Bd. NO. 50
  443 F.2d 101· 8th Cir.· 1971-05-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that pre-induction judicial review of a conscientious objector classification is barred by statute, as the Selective Service Board's refusal to reopen the classification did not constitute a clear departure from its statutory mandate.
• Salcedo v. Lt. Col. Richard F. Lauer
  430 F.2d 1282· 9th Cir.· 1970-08-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction, as the appellant had not exhausted administrative remedies and the claims did not invoke mandamus jurisdiction.
• Dunbar v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-26
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for both the ALJ's partially favorable decision and the SSA's non-medical denial of SSI benefits.
• Tracie Mitchem-Green v. Harris
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-24
  The district court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a petition for a writ of mandamus against the Supreme Court and its clerks, and therefore, the application to proceed in forma pauperis must be denied and the action dismissed.
• Dunbar v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-10
  The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and did not establish any other basis for jurisdiction.
• Am. Gold Label Foods, Inc. v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-12-23
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the breach of contract claim because the plaintiffs sought equitable relief, which is not authorized under the Little Tucker Act, and that the request for judicial review was improperly pleaded as it was filed prematu
• Haberer Sabah v. Emmel
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-11-21
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a clear right to mandamus relief because there is no mandatory deadline for adjudicating his petition, and the APA provides an adequate remedy. Furthermore, the court found no unreasonable delay or sufficient prejudice to gran
• Mafundu v. Mayorkas
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-08
  The Court granted the motion to dismiss, holding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the Immigration and Nationality Act bars judicial review of decisions regarding waivers and mandamus relief was not appropriate.
• Cortes v. Swacina
  627 F. Supp. 2d 1328· S.D. Fla.· 2008-11-12
  The court held that a plaintiff is a prevailing party under the Equal Access to Justice Act when a court order, even if issued before formal response, mandates agency action within a specific timeframe, thereby altering the legal relationship between the parties.
• Marie Banks v. Sec'y OF The Ind. Fam. & Soc. Servs. Admin.
  997 F.2d 231· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-15
  The court held that plaintiffs have standing to sue the federal Secretary of Health and Human Services regarding alleged violations of Medicaid regulations, but affirmed the district court's dismissal because the plaintiffs failed to state a viable claim against either the federa
• Fostvedt v. United States
  978 F.2d 1201· 10th Cir.· 1992-11-03
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the petitioner failed to demonstrate an explicit waiver of sovereign immunity.
• Chandler v. Commander
  863 F.2d 13· 5th Cir.· 1989-01-12
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from exercising jurisdiction over domestic relations matters, especially when a state court action is pending.
• Fierro v. Ellis C. MacDOUGAL
  685 F.2d 261· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-01
  The court held that Fierro's complaint stated a viable claim for deprivation of a state-created liberty interest without due process, and he should be allowed to amend his complaint.
• N. City Area-Wide Council, Inc. v. Romney
  469 F.2d 1326· 3d Cir.· 1972-12-04
  The court held that the district court's order for elections was not inconsistent with the prior mandate and affirmed the order, remanding for scheduling.
• Safir v. Gibson
  417 F.2d 972· 2d Cir.· 1969-09-26
  The court held that the plaintiffs have standing to sue for the recovery of improperly paid subsidies and that the Maritime Administrator's discretion to act is not unlimited, requiring consideration of the victim's interest.