{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}


Class_Presentation_18 - Class 18 U.S v Fla E.C.Ry(SC 1973...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Class 18 U.S. v. Fla E.C.Ry (SC 1973) Incentive Per Diem Ratemaking Formal or Informal D.C. Says formal, no written submissions under §1(14) (a) SC: §553(c) controls – “hearing” can be written; “after hearing” not hearing on the record See Allegheny Ludlum DC (Friendly), hearing requirement not limited to “a few legislative sports” Douglas (dissent) ratemaking has d.p. implications FPC v. Texaco (S.C. 1964) Douglas Rulemaking superior to case by case decisions – waiver provision is an escape valve. Heckler v. Campbell (SC 1983) Powell Heckler Can SSA use regulations to set vocational guidelines that deny Can hearings? hearings? S.C. yes. The purpose of Rulemaking is to eliminate hearings U.S. v. Nova Scotia (2d Cir 1977) Hot smoked whitefish rule applied by FDA in enforcement Hot proceeding 2d Cir: Stmt of Basis/Purpose insufficient - enforcement denied Weyerhauser v. Costle (D.C. Cir 1978) McGowan Weyerhauser Statement of basis and purpose must involve a “coherent discussion” – remanded for better substantiation Hard Look review case (State Farm) Hybrid procedures by statute on judicial review? Hybrid ...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online