agency relied factors (Maryland) · Go Syfert
← Maryland issues

agency relied factors in Maryland

7 Maryland opinions name it 1 courts 2018–2024 4 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Md. Office of People's Counsel v. Md. Pub. Serv. Comm'ngreen
md · 2018 · cited in 6 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2019–2024
2 sentences

2024There, the [United States] Supreme Court identified several factors that could render an agency action arbitrary or capricious, including whether: (1) there is a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made; (2) the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors; (3) there has been a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider; (5) the agency has entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (6) there is an explanation for a decision that runs counter to the evidence; and (7) the de

2024There, the [United States] Supreme Court identified several factors that could render an agency action arbitrary or capricious, including whether: (1) there is a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made; (2) the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors; (3) there has been a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider; (5) the agency has entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (6) there is an explanation for a decision that runs counter to the evidence; and (7) the de

26
Maryland Department of Environment v. Anacostia Riverkeepergreen
md · 2016 · cited in 3 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2019–2023
2 sentences

2019See Anacostia Riverkeeper, 447 Md. at 120-21 ; Office of People’s Counsel v. Public Service Commission, 461 Md. 380, 399 (2018).30 Under this standard, a reviewing court is not to substitute its own judgment for that of the agency and should affirm decisions of “less than ideal clarity” so long as the court can reasonably 30 Under the federal standard, the reviewing court may consider whether: (1) the agency’s choice was rationally connected to the facts found; (2) the agency considered the relevant factors; (3) the agency made a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors the le

2019See Anacostia Riverkeeper, 447 Md. at 120-21 ; Office of People’s Counsel v. Public Service Commission, 461 Md. 380, 399 (2018).30 Under this standard, a reviewing court is not to substitute its own judgment for that of the agency and should affirm decisions of “less than ideal clarity” so long as the court can reasonably 30 Under the federal standard, the reviewing court may consider whether: (1) the agency’s choice was rationally connected to the facts found; (2) the agency considered the relevant factors; (3) the agency made a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors the le

23
Comptroller v. FC-GEN Operations Inv.green
md · 2022 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023
1 sentence

2023Office of People’s Counsel, 461 Md. at 399 n.16. 42 In Comptroller of Maryland v. FC-GEN Operations Investments LLC, 482 Md. 343, 360 (2022), we explained that the phrase “errors of law” in connection with judicial review of a decision of an administrative agency “encompasses a variety of legal challenges, including: (1) the constitutionality of an agency’s decision; (2) whether the agency had 49 interpretation is a conclusion of law.” Kor-Ko Ltd., 451 Md. at 412 (quoting Carven v. State Ret. & Pension Sys. of Md., 416 Md. 389, 406 (2010)). “[A] court will not uphold an agency action that is b

11
Carven v. State Retirement & Pension Systemgreen
md · 2010 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023
1 sentence

2023Office of People’s Counsel, 461 Md. at 399 n.16. 42 In Comptroller of Maryland v. FC-GEN Operations Investments LLC, 482 Md. 343, 360 (2022), we explained that the phrase “errors of law” in connection with judicial review of a decision of an administrative agency “encompasses a variety of legal challenges, including: (1) the constitutionality of an agency’s decision; (2) whether the agency had 49 interpretation is a conclusion of law.” Kor-Ko Ltd., 451 Md. at 412 (quoting Carven v. State Ret. & Pension Sys. of Md., 416 Md. 389, 406 (2010)). “[A] court will not uphold an agency action that is b

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Harvey v. Marshall green
md · 2005
2 sentences

2024There, the [United States] Supreme Court identified several factors that could render an agency action arbitrary or capricious, including whether: (1) there is a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made; (2) the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors; (3) there has been a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider; (5) the agency has entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (6) there is an explanation for a decision that runs counter to the evidence; and (7) the de

2024There, the [United States] Supreme Court identified several factors that could render an agency action arbitrary or capricious, including whether: (1) there is a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made; (2) the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors; (3) there has been a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider; (5) the agency has entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (6) there is an explanation for a decision that runs counter to the evidence; and (7) the de

22024–2024
Dept. of Env. v. Carroll Cnty. Frederick Cnty. v. Dept. of Env. green
md · 2019
1 sentence

2023Office of People’s Counsel, 461 Md. at 399 n.16. 42 In Comptroller of Maryland v. FC-GEN Operations Investments LLC, 482 Md. 343, 360 (2022), we explained that the phrase “errors of law” in connection with judicial review of a decision of an administrative agency “encompasses a variety of legal challenges, including: (1) the constitutionality of an agency’s decision; (2) whether the agency had 49 interpretation is a conclusion of law.” Kor-Ko Ltd., 451 Md. at 412 (quoting Carven v. State Ret. & Pension Sys. of Md., 416 Md. 389, 406 (2010)). “[A] court will not uphold an agency action that is b

12023–2023
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. green
scotus · 1983
2 sentences

2023Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 , 103 S. Ct. 2856 , 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983).” We observed that in State Farm, the Supreme Court identified several factors that could render an agency action arbitrary or capricious, including whether: (1) there is a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made; (2) the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors; (3) there has been a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider; (5) the agency has entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (6) there is an ex

2023Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 , 103 S. Ct. 2856 , 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983).” We observed that in State Farm, the Supreme Court identified several factors that could render an agency action arbitrary or capricious, including whether: (1) there is a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made; (2) the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors; (3) there has been a clear error of judgment; (4) the agency relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider; (5) the agency has entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (6) there is an ex

12023–2023
Kor-Ko Ltd. v. Maryland Department of the Environment green
md · 2017
1 sentence

2023Office of People’s Counsel, 461 Md. at 399 n.16. 42 In Comptroller of Maryland v. FC-GEN Operations Investments LLC, 482 Md. 343, 360 (2022), we explained that the phrase “errors of law” in connection with judicial review of a decision of an administrative agency “encompasses a variety of legal challenges, including: (1) the constitutionality of an agency’s decision; (2) whether the agency had 49 interpretation is a conclusion of law.” Kor-Ko Ltd., 451 Md. at 412 (quoting Carven v. State Ret. & Pension Sys. of Md., 416 Md. 389, 406 (2010)). “[A] court will not uphold an agency action that is b

12023–2023
Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. green
scotus · 1975
2 sentences

2018This standard is not an invitation for a court to second-guess an agency's judgment: "a decision of less than ideal clarity" will be upheld "if the agency's path may be reasonably discerned." Bowman Transp., Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. , 419 U.S. 281 , 285-86, 95 S.Ct. 438 , 42 L.Ed.2d 447 (1974).

2018This standard is not an invitation for a court to second-guess an agency's judgment: "a decision of less than ideal clarity" will be upheld "if the agency's path may be reasonably discerned." Bowman Transp., Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. , 419 U.S. 281 , 285-86, 95 S.Ct. 438 , 42 L.Ed.2d 447 (1974).

12018–2018

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CFR § 40c.f.r.122.44 (3) CFR § 40c.f.r.123.44 (3) CFR § 40c.f.r.125.3 (3) CFR § 40c.f.r.130.2 (3) CFR § 40c.f.r.130.3 (3) CFR § 40c.f.r.130.7 (3) USC § 33u.s.c.1251 (3) USC § 33u.s.c.1311 (3) USC § 33u.s.c.1313 (3) USC § 33u.s.c.1319 (3) USC § 33u.s.c.1342 (3) USC § 33u.s.c.1362 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

MN 13 (1989–2019) MD 7 (2018–2024) NM 2 (2019–2024) KS 2 (2020–2020)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check