Kester v. Campbell (1981)
green
· 82 citation events
across 23 courts.
Showing the 46 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198120032026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Montana Wilderness Association v. Gene Terland (2013)
Cf. Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13 , 15–16 (9th Cir. 1981) (“In light of an agency’s presumed expertise in interpreting executive orders charged to its administration, we review such agency interpretations with great deference. . . .
“In light of an agency’s presumed expertise in interpreting executive orders charged to its administration, we review such agency interpretations with great deference. . . . All that is required is that the interpretation adopted by the agency be reasonable.”
green
Western Watersheds Project v. Bob Abbey (2013)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981); see also Am.
green
American Federation Of Government Employees, Afl-Cio (Afge), Petitioner v. Federal Labor Relations Authority (2000)
See NLRB v. Kolkka, 170 F.3d 937 , 939 (9th Cir. 1999) (statute); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981) (executive order); University of S. Cal. v. Cost of Living Council, 472 F.2d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir. 1972) (executive order).
executive order
See NLRB v. Kolkka, 170 F.3d 937 , 939 (9th Cir.1999) (statute); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981) (executive order); University of S. Cal. v. Cost of Living Council, 472 F.2d 1065, 1068 (Em.App.
green
Jean Dehainaut v. Federico Pena (1994)
Wagner v. Office of Personnel Management, 783 F.2d 1042, 1045 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 906 , 106 S.Ct. 3276 , 91 L.Ed.2d 566 (1986); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982).
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 16 (9th Cir.1981).
green
City & County of San Francisco v. Donald Trump (2018)
Because an agency has “presumed expertise in interpreting executive orders charged to its administration,” the Court generally will “review such agency interpretations with great deference.” Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981).
green
Kanemoto v. Reno (1994)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Kanemoto v. Reno (1994)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Jack E. Fetter v. United States (1992)
However, "this statute neither waives the federal government's sovereign immunity to suit nor indicates the appropriate forum for adjudication of the controversy." Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981); accord Holloman v. Watt, 708 F.2d 1399, 1401 (9th Cir.1983).
green
A.E. Finley & Associates, Inc. v. United States (1990)
Further, although § 1331 does not itself provide consent to be sued, Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982), the Administrative Procedure Act, specifically 5 U.S.C. § 702 , waives sovereign immunity under § 1331.
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982) (Civil Service Commission interpretation of Executive order of President).
green
Chula Vista City School District v. T.H. Bell, United States Secretary of Education, Chula Vista City School … (1985)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981) (Tucker Act, class action), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982); March v. United States, 506 F.2d 1306 , 1309 n. 1 (D.C.Cir.1974) (same); see also Zahn v. International Paper Co., 414 U.S. 291, 301 , 94 S.Ct. 505, 512 , 38 L.Ed.2d 511 (1973) (minimum amount for diversity jurisdiction, class action); Glover v. Johns-Manville Corp., 662 F.2d 225 , 231 (4th Cir.1981) (Tucker Act, multiple third-…
green
North Side Lumber Co., Summit Timber Co., Stevenson Co-Ply, Inc., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Simi… (1985)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982) 4 King and Jones dealt with the jurisdiction of the former United States Court of Claims, but the cases are relevant because the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982, Sec. 133, Pub.L. 97-164, 96 Stat. 25, 39, vested the newly-created Claims Court with the trial jurisdiction of the former Court of Claims.
green
North Side Lumber Co. v. Block (1985)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982). .
green
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Raymond J. D… (1984)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981)
green
International Union, United Automobile v. Donovan (1984)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Susan Alaniz, Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Office of Personnel Management, Appellees/cross-Appellants (1984)
Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16-17 [ 85 S.Ct. 792, 801-02 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 ] . . . (1965); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981). 545 F.Supp. at 1187 .
green
Holloman v. Watt (1983)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981). 9 Appellees argue that Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 , 91 S.Ct. 1999 , 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), authorizes a damage action based upon a violation of due process without an explicit waiver of sovereign immunity.
green
Holloman v. Watt (1983)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Temengil v. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (1983)
Kester v. Campbell. 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981), cert.denied _, U.S. _, 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982).
green
Alaniz v. Office of Personnel Management (1982)
Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16-17 , 85 S.Ct. 792, 801-802 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 (1965); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981).
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981). 1 district court, a plaintiff “must identify an independent basis for the waiver of sovereign 2 immunity.”21 3 Seeto alleges that the APA supplies that waiver for his claims.22 The APA allows the 4 federal government to be sued in federal district court if two conditions are met:23 (1) the 5 plaintiff seeks relief other than money damages,24 and (2) no other adequate remedy exists in 6 another court.25 The Secretary conten…
green
McMillan v. Garland (2022)
However, § 1331 “neither waives the federal 12 government’s sovereign immunity to suit nor indicates the appropriate forum for 13 adjudication of the controversy.” Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981); see 14 also Castaneda, 2019 WL 2076036 , at *2 (“The Ninth Circuit has consistently held that 15 § 1331 does not waive the government’s sovereign immunity from suit.”).
Labor Relations Auth., 204 F.3d 1272 , 1274-75 (9th Cir.2000), and Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15-16 (9th Cir.1981)).
green
In re Montana Wilderness Ass'n (2011)
No showing has been made that the chosen definition is unreasonable, rendering it arbitrary and capricious. 8 Cf. Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15-16 (9th Cir.1981) (citing cases).
green
Sherley v. Sebelius (2011)
Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16-17 , 85 S.Ct. 792 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 (1965); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15-16 (9th Cir. 1981).
All that is required is that the interpretation adopted by the agency be reasonable.” Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15-16 (9th Cir.1981).
See Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 18 (1965) (agency interpretation of presidential orders is lawful “if . . . the [agency]’s interpretation is not unreasona- ble, if the language of the orders bears [its] construction”); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981) (“In light of an agency’s presumed expertise in interpreting executive orders charged to its administration,” the agency’s interpre- tations should receive “great deference.”).
“In light of an agency’s presumed expertise in interpreting executive orders charged to its administration,” the agency’s interpre- tations should receive “great deference.”
green
McMillan v. Department of the Interior (1995)
Holloman, 708 F.2d at 1401 (citing Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982)); Gilbert v. DaGrossa, 756 F.2d 1455, 1458 (9th Cir.1985).
green
Clarry v. United States (1995)
The interpretation adopted by the agency must be reasonable, “ ‘and it is considered reasonable’ unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the [President’s order].” Id. at 1045 (quoting Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15-16 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982)); see also, Dehainaut, 32 F.3d at 1073 .
green
Robishaw Engineering, Inc. v. United States (1995)
Instrument, Inc. v. United States, 715 F.2d 713, 724 (2d Cir.1983); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1146 , 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982); Beale v. Blount, 461 F.2d 1133, 1138 (5th Cir.1972); Serra v. United States Gen.
green
Adamson v. Radosevic (1988)
See, e.g., Fairview Township v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 773 F.2d 517, 528 (3d Cir.1985); Portsmouth Redev. & Housing Auth. v. Pierce, 706 F.2d 471 , 474 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 960 , 104 S.Ct. 392 , 78 L.Ed.2d 336 (1983); Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Kester v. Devine (1982)
For a more complete discussion of the facts underlying this matter, see Kester v. Campbell, 467 F.Supp. 913 (D.Haw.1979) (“Kester /”), rev’d, 652 F.2d 13 (9th Cir. 1981) ("Kester II"), cert, denied, — U.S.-, 102 S.Ct. 1008 , 71 L.Ed.2d 298 (1982).
"Kester II"
green
Bauer v. McCoy (1982)
Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981).
See 5 C.F.R. § 591.210 (b)(1); see also Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir.1981) ("employees of the federal government who are located outside the continental United States ... are entitled to a cost-of-living allowance, in addition to their base pay") (Farris, J.), cert. denied sub nom.
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Consolidated Edison v. U.S., Dept., Energy (2000)
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981).
green
Cities Of Anaheim, Riverside, Banning, Colton And Azusa, California v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1984)
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
green
Cities of Anaheim, Riverside, Banning, Colton & Azusa v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1984)
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981).
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981).
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir. 1981).
green
Movimiento Democracia, Inc. v. Johnson (2016)
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981) (“In light of an agency’s presumed expertise in interpreting executive orders charged to its administration, we review such agency interpretations with great deference.”); accord Alaniz v. Office of Pers.
green
In re: Marshall L. Rader and Barbara J. Rader (2013)
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 16 (9th Cir.1981) (“The language of the [executive] order is sufficiently ambiguous to permit several reasonable interpretations. ...”); Univ.
green
Matsuo v. United States (2006)
Kidwell, 56 F.3d at 284 (plaintiffs complaint must request non-monetary relief that has considerable value independent of any future potential for monetary relief); Marshall Leasing, Inc. v. U.S., 893 F.2d 1096, 1099 (9th Cir.1990); Hahn v. US., 757 F.2d 581, 590 (3d Cir.1985); see also Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13, 15 (9th Cir.1981) (“We will not construe plaintiffs’ request as one for injunctive relief when the relief sought is substantively equivalent to a request for …
green
Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank (1983)
See Kester v. Campbell, 652 F.2d 13 (9th Cir. 1981).