Search for: "In Re: Application of Chevron" Results 161 - 180 of 296
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 May 2008, 12:34 pm
We’ve learned terms like binding precedent, obitur dictum, res ipsa loquitor and stare decisis. [read post]
29 Jan 2019, 7:23 am by Adrian Vermeule
As Justice Antonin Scalia once put it in the context of deference to agency statutory interpretations under Chevron U.S.A. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 10:55 pm by Venkat Rangan
The court directive is: “Each email is a separate communication, for which a privilege may or may not be applicable. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 9:48 pm
By jettisoning the legal requirements of the applicable rules, and the mature and well-developed body of case law that has grown up around those rules, the principles are profoundly destructive of existing law.2. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:10 am by Andrew Frisch
Walling, 324 U.S. 490, 493 (1945), and is neither erroneous nor unreasonable, see, e.g., Chevron U.S.A. [read post]
10 Mar 2015, 6:22 am by Brian Wolfman and Bradley Girard
The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) sued DOL, arguing that the 2010 re-interpretation was invalid because it did not go through notice-and-comment rulemaking. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 8:06 am by Jill Family
  In 2007, in a case called In re Escobar, the BIA refused to extend Cuevas-Gaspar by prohibiting imputation from parent to minor child to fulfill the requirement that the non-citizen seeking cancellation of removal have been a lawful permanent resident for at least five years. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 2:00 pm by Alan Horowitz
  Justice Scalia then elaborated on his skepticism over the government’s attempts to prevail on the statute alone, stating that “we’re not writing on a blank slate here. [read post]
11 Nov 2022, 9:18 am by Gus Hurwitz
” This conclusion follows from a direct application of Chevron: courts are responsible for determining whether a statute is ambiguous; agencies are responsible for determining the (reasonable) meaning of a statute that is ambiguous. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 9:05 pm by Alana Bevan
Contrary to a well-known study, which suggested that the doctrine is relatively rarely invoked, Salmanowitz and Spamann found that the Court applied Chevron in about 80 percent of applicable cases, suggesting that “it is not a precedent that the Supreme Court consistently ignores or overlooks. [read post]
6 Jan 2009, 9:14 am
  One critical piece here is whether Congress provided the USPTO the rule making authority explicitly for the purpose of expediting patent applications. [read post]
3 Sep 2018, 9:30 pm by Robert V. Percival
Yet this perceptive insight on Chevron comes from a judge who rarely defers to agency action. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 9:30 pm by Sarah Madigan
” WHAT WE’RE READING THIS WEEK In a forthcoming article for the Fordham Law Review, Catherine Sharkey of the New York University School of Law argued that reviewing courts should incorporate State Farm “hard look” review when evaluating the second step of Chevron review—considering whether an agency’s statutory interpretation was reasonable. [read post]
31 Aug 2020, 4:15 pm by Unknown
"Resisting Social Death with Dignity: The Strategy of Re-escaping among Young Asylum-seekers in the Wake of Sweden’s Sharpened Asylum Laws," European Journal of Social Work, vol. 23, no. 3 (2020)- Author is based in Sweden. [read post]
12 May 2021, 5:12 am by Cal Warriner
It was compiled by the Pesticide Re-evaluation Division of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) and the OPP’s Health Effects Division. [read post]
28 Jan 2018, 1:00 am by Aimee Denholm
In the matter of an application by Kevin Maguire for Judicial Review, heard 19 Oct 2017. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 3:00 am by Louis M. Solomon
  Following In re Kinoshita & Co., 287 F.2d 951 (2d Cir. 1961), the Court found that the narrow clause applied only to those disputes relating to the interpretation and performance of the contract itself”. [read post]
12 May 2021, 5:12 am by Cal Warriner
It was compiled by the Pesticide Re-evaluation Division of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) and the OPP’s Health Effects Division. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 9:09 pm
" [Sidenote: should the applicability of the TCPA to "uncharged calls" affect the First Amendment analysis?] [read post]