Simpson v. Young (1988)
green
· 19 citation events
across 5 courts.
Showing the 13 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
The FAA was “not required to address every argument advanced by petitioners,” only, as it has done, to “state the main reasons for its decision and indicate that it has considered the most important objections.” Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1434-35 (D.C.Cir.1988).
Cf. Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1433-35 (D.C.Cir.1988) (noting that agencies generally are not obligated “to address every argument advanced [by a petitioner] ... no matter how minor or inconsequential the argument may be”).
green
Public Citizen, Inc., Aviation Consumer Action Project, and Families of Pan-Am 103/lockerbie v. Federal Aviat… (1993)
With regard to responding to public comments, it is settled that “the agency [is not required] to discuss every item of fact or opinion included in the submissions made to it in informal rulemaking.” Automotive Parts & Accessories Ass’n v. Boyd, 407 F.2d 330, 338 (D.C.Cir.1968); cf. Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1435 (D.C.Cir.1988) (“[t]he agency need only state the main reasons for its decision and indicate it has considered the most important objections”).
This satisfies the requirement that an agency "need only state the main reasons for its decision and indicate that it has considered the most important objections." Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1435 (D.C.Cir.1988). 16 The AHPA complains that appellants rely on post hoc evidence in the form of an affidavit by Dr. Dussault, a USDA veterinarian.
green
American Horse Protection Ass'n v. Yeutter (1990)
This satisfies the requirement that an agency “need only state the main reasons for its decision and indicate that it has considered the most important objections.” Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1435 (D.C.Cir.1988).
green
Banfi Products Corp. v. United States (1997)
Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1431 (D.C.Cir.1988).
The court noted that “[w]hile other approaches may have been reasonable as well, the Court is not persuaded that the agency’s decisions about whether to impose a compliance period at all, and how long a period would be necessary, are irrational given the range of viewpoints that had been presented during the notice and comment period.” Id. at 400 . 61 to discuss every item of fact or opinion included in the submissions made to it in informal rulemaking.”); Simpson v. Young, …
“The agency need only state the main reasons for its decision and indicate it has considered the most important objections[.]”
green
Lee Memorial Hospital v. Sebelius (2016)
“The agency need only state the main reasons for its decision and indicate that it has considered the most important objections.” Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1435 (D.C.
“The agency need only state the main reasons for its decision and indicate that it has considered the most important objections.” Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1435 (D.C.Cir.1988).
green
East Alabama Medical Center v. Shalala (1996)
Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1435 (D.C.Cir.1988).
green
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Uaw v. Johns… (1989)
See also, e.g., Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429 (D.C.Cir.1988); Public Citizen Health Research Group v. Tyson, 796 F.2d 1479, 1489-90, 1492 (D.C.Cir.1986), sustaining risk assessments based on animal studies.
green
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc. (1989)
See also, e.g., Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429 (D.C.Cir.1988); Public Citizen Health Research Group v. Tyson, 796 F.2d l479, 1489-90, 1492 (D.C.Cir.1986), sustaining risk assessments based on animal studies.
green
Synernet Corp. v. United States (1998)
See Simpson v. Young, 854 F.2d 1429, 1433-34 (D.C.Cir.1988).