Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co. (1973) - formal rule-making requires statute that requires "hearing on the record." Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1978) - courts may not impose additional procedural requirements on top of the APA in rule-making.
This category includes United States case law interpreting the general processes of administrative law and agency authority to make and interpret it. Subcategories This category has the following 2 subcategories, out of 2 total.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 463 U.S. 29 (1983), commonly known in U.S. administrative law as State Farm, is a United States Supreme Court decision concerning regulations requiring passive restraints in cars.
Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act gives the following definitions: . Rulemaking is "an agency process for formulating, amending, or repealing a rule." A rule in turn is "the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy."
In 1939, Roosevelt requested for Attorney General Frank Murphy to form a committee to investigate practices and procedures in American administrative law and suggest improvements. That committee's report, the Final Report of Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure , contained detailed information about the development and ...
Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 603 U.S. 799 (2024), is a United States Supreme Court case about the statute of limitations for judicial review of federal agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. The legal question under review was whether a challenge to the validity of a rule must be ...
It is often referred to as Chenery I, as four years later the case was before the Supreme Court a second time in Chenery II. Chenery I set out what is known as the Chenery Doctrine, a basic principle of U.S. administrative law that an agency may not defend an administrative decision on new grounds not set forth by the agency in its original ...
Overton Park is one of "the most important cases in the administrative law repertoire". [11] It marked a shift in how lawyers attacked federal regulation, [11] and is considered a landmark case. [2] Besides being the first interpretation of Section 701(a)(2) of the APA, it provided scholars with a "great deal" of information on Section 706 of ...