7 Rhode Island opinions name it 1 courts 1993–2010 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Rhode Island 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpered2 sentences2010In Citizens to Preserve *Page 19 Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe , 401 U.S. 402 , 416 (1971) ( overruled on other grounds by Califano v. Sanders , 430 U.S. 99 (1977)), the United States Supreme Court stated that to make a finding of arbitrariness, capriciousness or an abuse of discretion, "the court must consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment." After a thorough review of the record, this Court is satisfied the Board's decision is the result of numerous errors of judgment, the result of which is an arbi 2009Our Supreme Court has explained that "to make a finding of arbitrariness, capriciousness or an abuse of discretion, `the court must consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment.'" Sakonnet Rogers , 536 A.2d at 896 (quoting Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe , 401 U.S. 402 , 416 (1971)). | 5 | 7 |
Milardo v. Coastal Resources Management Councilgreen1 sentence1993Further, under Rhode Island General Law 1956 (1980 Reenactment) § 46-23-6 , the "primary responsibility" of the CRMC is "the continuing planning for and management of the resources of the state's coastal region." Pursuant to statute, the CRMC is charged with the goals: "[T]o preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, restore the coastal resources of the state for this and succeeding generations though comprehensive and coordinated long-range planning and management designed to produce the maximum benefit for society from such coastal resources; and that preservation and restoration of eco | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Califano v. Sanders
green
1 sentence2010In Citizens to Preserve *Page 19 Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe , 401 U.S. 402 , 416 (1971) ( overruled on other grounds by Califano v. Sanders , 430 U.S. 99 (1977)), the United States Supreme Court stated that to make a finding of arbitrariness, capriciousness or an abuse of discretion, "the court must consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment." After a thorough review of the record, this Court is satisfied the Board's decision is the result of numerous errors of judgment, the result of which is an arbi | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Sakonnet Rogers, Inc. v. Coastal Resources Management Council
green
1 sentence2009Our Supreme Court has explained that "to make a finding of arbitrariness, capriciousness or an abuse of discretion, `the court must consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment.'" Sakonnet Rogers , 536 A.2d at 896 (quoting Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe , 401 U.S. 402 , 416 (1971)). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Goncalves v. NMU Pension Trust
green
1 sentence2009Further, the arbitrary and capricious standard "means that reviewing courts will uphold administrative decisions . . . as long as the administrative interpreters have acted within their authority to make such decisions and their decisions were rational, logical, and supported by substantial evidence." Goncalves v. NMU Pension Trust , 818 A.2d 678 , 682-83 (R.I. 2003) (citing Doyle v. Paul Revere Life Ins. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Perron v. ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW, ETC.
green
2 sentences1994In effect, the Board "administratively vetoed [a] use conditionally authorized and thereby exceeded power conferred upon it by ordinance." Perron, 117 R.I. at 574 , 369 A.2d at 640 . 1994In effect, the Board "administratively vetoed [a] use conditionally authorized and thereby exceeded power conferred upon it by ordinance." Perron, 117 R.I. at 574 , 369 A.2d at 640 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.