Zone Of Interests Test

500 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  606 F.2d 1031· D.C. Cir.· 1979-04-20 ·cited 168×
  The court held that the SEC's decision not to adopt comprehensive environmental and equal employment disclosure rules was not arbitrary and capricious, and that judicial review of the SEC's procedural compliance with NEPA is appropriate.
• Nat'l Automatic Laundry & Cleaning Council v. Shultz
  443 F.2d 689· D.C. Cir.· 1971-03-31 ·cited 168×
  The court held that while jurisdiction existed for judicial review of the Administrator's interpretation, the Administrator's interpretation of the 1966 FLSA amendments was correct on the merits.
• Agrico Chem. Co. v. Dep't OF Env't Reg.
  406 So. 2d 478· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-10-07 ·cited 148×
  Agrico Chemical Company sought judicial review of a Florida Department of Environmental Regulation decision denying its construction permit for a solid sulphur-handling facility in Tampa. The court reversed, holding that business competitors (Freeport and Sulphur Terminals) were
• City OF Davis v. Coleman
  521 F.2d 661· 9th Cir.· 1975-07-30 ·cited 119×
  The court held that the City of Davis has standing to challenge the failure to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under NEPA and CEQA, and that the agencies unreasonably concluded no EIS/EIR was required.
• Shannon v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  436 F.2d 809· 3d Cir.· 1970-12-30 ·cited 118×
  The court held that HUD's approval of a change to a 221(d)(3) rent supplement project, without considering its effect on racial concentration and without a required public hearing, violated the Housing Act of 1949 and the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968.
• Amey, Inc. v. Gulf Abstract & Title, Inc.
  758 F.2d 1486· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-29 ·cited 116×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, finding that Amey had standing to sue under the antitrust laws and that the statute of limitations did not bar the claims.
• Action Alliance OF Senior Citizens OF Greater Philadelphia v. Heckler
  789 F.2d 931· D.C. Cir.· 1986-05-02 ·cited 99×
  The court held that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the HHS regulations but that only the claim regarding the omission of the self-evaluation requirement was ripe for review. The claims regarding the Secretary's delay in approving other agencies' regulations were moot.
• Montgomery v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs.
  468 So. 2d 1014· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-04-15 ·cited 97×
  Food stamp recipients challenged a proposed Florida workfare rule on administrative grounds, claiming lack of standing and mootness. The appellate court found standing existed but affirmed dismissal on mootness grounds because the rule's implementation was limited to two counties
• Fentron Indus., Inc. v. The Nat'l Shopmen Pension Fund
  674 F.2d 1300· 9th Cir.· 1982-04-21 ·cited 96×
  The court held that Fentron had standing to sue under ERISA, the employee class was properly certified, and the cancellation of vested employees' Past Service Credits violated ERISA § 203(c)(1)(B), but ERISA does not impose per se personal fiduciary liability for violations.
• In & for Kent Cnty. James M. Crowhorn
  2002 WL 1767529· Del. Super. Ct.· 2002-09-03 ·cited 95×
  The court denied the plaintiff's application for judicial reassignment or recusal. The court found that while the plaintiff alleged an appearance of intellectual antagonism and procedural unfairness, these allegations did not meet the legal standard for recusal under the Delaware
• The Fla. Dep't OF Offender Rehab. v. Leroy Jerry and the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings
  353 So. 2d 1230· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-01-10 ·cited 91×
  An inmate challenged the validity of a Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation rule governing prison disciplinary procedures under the state's Administrative Procedure Act. The court reversed the administrative hearing examiner's finding that the rule was invalid, holding t
• Wash. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  513 F.2d 1142· 9th Cir.· 1975-01-20 ·cited 88×
  The court's majority opinion incorrectly grounds standing for the Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission (WUTC) on the doctrine of parens patriae and for NARUC as a representative of state agencies.
• Rubylee Davis v. Romney
  490 F.2d 1360· 3d Cir.· 1974-01-14 ·cited 86×
  The court held that plaintiffs have standing to sue for injunctive and declaratory relief under the National Housing Act and that the district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1337. However, the injunction granted was too broad and must be vacated.
• Env't Def. Fund v. Tenn. Valley Auth.
  468 F.2d 1164· 6th Cir.· 1972-12-13 ·cited 81×
  The court held that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) applies to ongoing federal projects, requiring an environmental impact statement even if construction began before NEPA's effective date, if significant environmental impacts are still anticipated.
• Conference of Studio Unions v. Loew's Inc.
  193 F.2d 51· 9th Cir.· 1951-11-02 ·cited 78×
  Appellants, who are not directly injured by a lessening of commercial competition in the motion picture industry, cannot recover under the antitrust laws for damages incidental to an alleged conspiracy.
• CBS Inc. v. The Honorable Don J. Young
  522 F.2d 234· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-02 ·cited 74×
  A district court's order broadly prohibiting parties, their relatives, friends, and associates from discussing a case with the news media or public constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint on First Amendment freedoms.
• B.K. Instrument, Inc. v. United States
  715 F.2d 713· 2d Cir.· 1983-08-04 ·cited 73×
  An unsuccessful bidder has standing to challenge a government contract award if they allege injury in fact and their interest is arguably within the zone of interests protected by the relevant procurement statutes.
• Control Data Corp. v. Baldrige
  655 F.2d 283· D.C. Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 72×
  Manufacturers challenging government computer procurement standards lack standing because their economic interests are not arguably within the zone of interests protected by the Brooks Act.
• NEW Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc. v. United GAS Pipe Line Co.
  732 F.2d 452· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-21 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the denial of permissive intervention to the Mayor and City Council of New Orleans was not an abuse of discretion.
• TAX Analysts AND Advocates and Thomas F. Field v. Blumenthal
  566 F.2d 130· D.C. Cir.· 1977-06-15 ·cited 68×
  The court held that neither taxpayer nor competitor standing was established because the alleged injuries did not fall within the "zone of interests" protected by the relevant tax code provisions.
• Minn. Pub. Interest Research Grp. v. Butz
  498 F.2d 1314· 8th Cir.· 1974-06-10 ·cited 68×
  The dissent argues that routine extensions of logging contracts are not "major" federal actions significantly affecting the environment, and thus do not require an environmental impact statement under NEPA.
• Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Gracey
  809 F.2d 794· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-09 ·cited 66×
  The Haitian Refugee Center (HRC) lacks Article III standing because it failed to demonstrate a sufficient causal connection between the government's interdiction program and any concrete injury to its organizational purpose or activities.
• Rosen v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & GAS Co.
  477 F.2d 90· 3d Cir.· 1973-03-08 ·cited 60×
  The court held that Title VII prohibits sex discrimination in pension and retirement plans, and that male employees who retired early under discriminatory plans are entitled to compensatory damages.
• Comm. FOR Auto Responsibility (C.A.R.) v. Solomon
  603 F.2d 992· D.C. Cir.· 1979-07-24 ·cited 54×
• Public Citizen v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.
  565 F.2d 708· D.C. Cir.· 1977-08-25 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the Machinery Dealers National Association (MDNA) lacked standing to challenge the sale of government property because its members failed to demonstrate a concrete and particularized "injury in fact" that was redressable by the court.
• Gull Airborne Instruments, Inc. v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  694 F.2d 838· D.C. Cir.· 1982-11-30 ·cited 52×
  The court held that Gull had standing to challenge the contract award but not its administration, that laches did not bar the claim, and remanded for a determination of mootness.
• Citizens Concerned FOR Separation OF Church & State v. The City & Cnty. OF Denver
  628 F.2d 1289· 10th Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the appeal must be dismissed because the plaintiff association failed to establish on the record that any constitutionally protected interest of itself or its members was abridged by the challenged display, thus lacking standing.
• Malamud v. Sinclair OIL Corp.
  521 F.2d 1142· 6th Cir.· 1975-08-19 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the investment companies' allegations of financing denial, which allegedly hindered their expansion, fell within the zone of interests protected by the Sherman and Clayton Acts, thus establishing standing to sue.
• Abourezk v. Reagan
  785 F.2d 1043· D.C. Cir.· 1986-03-11 ·cited 51×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the statute permits the government's exclusion of aliens based on their entry or presence being prejudicial to public interest, and that such authority is constitutional.
• 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
• Merriam v. Kunzig
  476 F.2d 1233· 3d Cir.· 1973-02-16 ·cited 50×
  The panel's opinion may have obscured the significance of the substantive legal claim issue by combining it with the standing issue.
• 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.
• Riegle v. Fed. Open Mkt. Comm.
  656 F.2d 873· D.C. Cir.· 1981-06-24 ·cited 49×
  The court held that while the Senator likely had standing under traditional tests, his claim should be dismissed due to separation of powers concerns, as he could seek redress from his legislative colleagues.
• Fla. Bd. OF Med. v. Fla. Acad. OF Cosm. Surgery, Inc.
  808 So. 2d 243· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-01-23 ·cited 48×
  This consolidated administrative appeal concerns whether Florida Board of Medicine rules governing office surgery standards constitute invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority. The appellate court affirms the administrative law judge's holding that nurse anesthetists
• Cap. Legal Found. v. Commodity Credit Corp.
  711 F.2d 253· D.C. Cir.· 1983-06-17 ·cited 48×
  A party must allege injury in fact derived from agency action and that the injury falls within the zone of interests protected by the relevant law to have standing to challenge agency action.
• E. Ky. Welf. Rights Org. v. Simon
  506 F.2d 1278· D.C. Cir.· 1974-10-09 ·cited 48×
  Revenue Ruling 69-545 was invalid because it was issued without compliance with the informal rulemaking procedures required by Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act.
• The W. Va. Highlands Conservancy v. Island Creek Coal Co.
  441 F.2d 232· 4th Cir.· 1971-04-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Conservancy has standing to sue and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction.
• Sierra Club v. Hickel
  433 F.2d 24· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-16 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the granting of a preliminary injunction was an abuse of discretion and must be reversed, despite the plaintiff having standing.
• Fla. Med. Ass'n, Inc. v. Dep't OF Prof'l Reg.
  426 So. 2d 1112· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-02-02 ·cited 47×
  The Florida Medical Association and ophthalmologists challenged a Board of Optometry rule permitting optometrists to prescribe legend drugs, asserting the rule exceeded the board's authority and infringed on physicians' right to practice medicine. The court reversed the administr
• Cmty. Nutrition Inst. v. Block
  698 F.2d 1239· D.C. Cir.· 1983-01-21 ·cited 46×
  The court held that individual consumers lacked standing to challenge milk marketing orders as indirect beneficiaries, and that a handler failed to exhaust administrative remedies by seeking informal rulemaking instead of a formal adjudicatory hearing.
• Bravman v. Bassett Furniture Indus., Inc.
  552 F.2d 90· 3d Cir.· 1977-02-16 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting directed verdicts for the defendants on both the breach of contract and Sherman Act claims. Bravman presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find the contract was not terminable at will and that he had standing to sue under
• City OF Lafayette v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  454 F.2d 941· D.C. Cir.· 1971-10-12 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission erred in refusing to consider antitrust allegations when authorizing the issuance of securities, as its duty under the Federal Power Act requires consideration of anti-competitive consequences. The Securities and Exchange Commissio
• Saladin v. City OF Milledgeville
  812 F.2d 687· 11th Cir.· 1987-03-17 ·cited 45×
  The court held that plaintiffs had standing to challenge the city seal's use on stationery and official documents, reversing the district court's dismissal.
• Pesikoff v. The Sec'y of Labor
  501 F.2d 757· D.C. Cir.· 1974-05-03 ·cited 45×
  The court held that a prospective employer has standing to challenge the denial of alien labor certification and that the Secretary of Labor did not abuse his discretion in denying certification based on the availability of U.S. workers, treating the 'live-in' requirement as a pe
• Nikki McIntosh v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.
  5 F.4th 1309· 11th Cir.· 2021-07-27 ·cited 44×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court erred by dismissing the case sua sponte for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction without notice and an opportunity to be heard, and that the plaintiffs' alleged injuries were sufficient to meet the amount-in-controversy requirement
• Rev. Chester O. Thompson v. Washington
  497 F.2d 626· D.C. Cir.· 1973-12-10 ·cited 44×
  Tenants of low-rent public housing are entitled to notice of proposed rent increases and an opportunity to present written objections.
• Lodge 1858 v. Paine
  436 F.2d 882· D.C. Cir.· 1970-04-21 ·cited 44×
  Employees and their union have standing to challenge NASA's use of contractor employees, and the exhaustion of administrative remedies is now complete, allowing the case to proceed on the merits.
• Abdon Acevedo v. Nassau Cnty.
  500 F.2d 1078· 2d Cir.· 1974-07-02 ·cited 43×
  The court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the housing plan was still in the planning stage and could be abandoned without violating any duty.
• Wilderness Soc'y v. Griles
  824 F.2d 4· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-10 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while the plaintiffs have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of future injury to establish standing on the current record, the district court erred by denying discovery before ruling on the summary judgment motion.
• Elton E. Gray v. Greyhound Lines
  545 F.2d 169· D.C. Cir.· 1976-10-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that plaintiffs, as employees, have standing to challenge discriminatory hiring practices that affect their terms and conditions of employment and create a hostile work environment, even if they were not directly denied employment.