43 C.F.R. § 1810.3
Effect of laches; authority to bind government
(a) The authority of the United States to enforce a public right or protect a public interest is not vitiated or lost by acquiescence of its officers or agents, or by their laches, neglect of duty, failure to act, or delays in the performance of their duties.
(b) The United States is not bound or estopped by the acts of its officers or agents when they enter into an arrangement or agreement to do or cause to be done what the law does not sanction or permit.
(c) Reliance upon information or opinion of any officer, agent or employee or on records maintained by land offices cannot operate to vest any right not authorized by law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1982–2018 · leading case: Sprint Corp. v. Dep't of the Interior, 356 F. Supp. 3d 12 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
Sprint Corp. v. Dep't of the Interior, 356 F. Supp. 3d 12 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “(citing 43 C.F.R. § 1810.3 (a) ). There is no basis in the record for the Court to disturb the IBLA's conclusion.”
Mafrige v. United States, 893 F. Supp. 691 (S.D. Tex. 1995). “That section states that “[w]here the United States does not own all of the mineral deposits under any lands sought to be leased and which are affected by this chapter, the Secretary is authorized to lease the interest of the United States in any such mineral deposits ____” This…”
Silver State Land, LLC v. Schneider, 145 F. Supp. 3d 113 (D.D.C. 2015). “5 (The Secretary has "the authority to review any decision of any employee or employee of the Department^]”); 43 C.F.R. § 1810.3 (b) ("The United^States is not bound or estopped by the acts of its officers or agents when they enter into an arrangement or agreement to do or cause…”
Burton/Hawks, Inc. v. United States, 553 F. Supp. 86 (D. Utah 1982). “43 C.F.R. § 1810.3 . Section 1810.3 establishes the principle that plaintiff’s reliance on the erroneous statements of the district engineer could not estop the IBLA from denying a two-year extension of the lease where the lease did not qualify for the extension under the terms…”
Sprint Corp. v. United States Dep't of Interior (D.D.C. 2018). “(citing 43 C.F.R. § 1810.3 (a)). There is no basis in the record for the Court to disturb the IBLA’s conclusion.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.