Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 48 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Larionoff.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Larionoff Anchor | green | “plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.” | 15 |
| 2 | United States v. Larionoff | green | “regulations, in order to be valid, must be consistent with the statute under which they are promulgated.” | 13 |
| 3 | United States v. Larionoff | green | “in construing administrative regulations, 'the ultimate criterion is the administrative interpretation, which becomes of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.” | 10 |
| 4 | First National Bank Of Fayetteville v. James E. Smith | green | “willful and unreasoning action, without consideration and in disregard of the facts or circumstances of the case.” | 7 |
| 5 | First National Bank Of Fayetteville v. James E. Smith | green | “must render an independent decision on the basis of the same administrative record as that before the district court; the identical standard of review is employed at both levels; and once appealed, the district court decision is accorded no particular deference.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.