15 U.S.C. § 1710

Court review of orders

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Petition; jurisdiction; findings of Director; additional evidence; finality

Any person, aggrieved by an order or determination of the Director issued after a hearing, may obtain a review of such order or determination in the court of appeals of the United States, within any circuit wherein such person resides or has his principal place of business, or in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, by filing in such court, within sixty days after the entry of such order or determination, a written petition praying that the order or determination of the Director be modified or be set aside in whole or in part. A copy of such petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Director, and thereupon the Director shall file in the court the record upon which the order or determination complained of was entered, as provided in section 2112 of title 28. No objection to an order or determination of the Director shall be considered by the court unless such objection shall have been urged before the Director. The finding of the Director as to the facts, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive. If either party shall apply to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence, and shall show to the satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence is material and that there were reasonable grounds for failure to adduce such evidence in the hearing before the Director, the court may order such additional evidence to be taken before the Director and to be adduced upon a hearing in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as to the court may seem proper. The Director may modify his findings as to the facts by reason of the additional evidence so taken, and shall file such modified or new findings, which, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive, and his recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside of the original order. Upon the filing of such petition, the jurisdiction of the court shall be exclusive and its judgment and decree, affirming, modifying, or setting aside, in whole or in part, any order of the Director, shall be final, subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification as provided in section 1254 of title 28.

(b) Stay of order

The commencement of proceedings under subsection (a) shall not, unless specifically ordered by the court, operate as a stay of the Secretary’s 11 So in original. Probably should be “Director’s”. order.

(Pub. L. 90–448, title XIV, § 1411, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 595; Pub. L. 111–203, title X, § 1098A(1), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2105.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2010—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 111–203 substituted “Director” for “Secretary” wherever appearing.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Effective Date

Section effective upon the expiration of two hundred and seventy days after Aug. 1, 1968, see section 1423 of Pub. L. 90–448, set out as a note under section 1701 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1974–1990 · leading case: Cost Control Mktg. & Mgmt., Inc. v. Samuel R. Pierce, Jr., Sec'y of the Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 848 F.2d 47 (3rd Cir. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cost Control Mktg. & Mgmt., Inc. v. Samuel R. Pierce, Jr., Sec'y of the Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 848 F.2d 47 (3rd Cir. 1988). · cites it 3× “15 U.S.C.A. § 1710 (a). Cost Control contends that the district court erred in dismissing its complaint seeking a declaration that the Secretary lacked jurisdiction to determine whether Cost Control’s sales fall within the purview *49 of the Act.”

Samara Dev. Corp. v. Marlow, 556 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 1990). “4th DCA 1988), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified the following question to be of great public importance: IS A CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF A CONDOMINIUM IN FLORIDA EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE INTERSTATE LAND SALES FULL DISCLOSURE ACT, 15 U.S.C. § 1710 ,…”

Cumberland Capital Corp. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 551 (M.D. Tenn. 1977). · cites it 2× “15 U.S.C. § 1710 (a) provides in pertinent part as follows: Any person, aggrieved by an order or determination of the Secretary issued after a hearing, may obtain, a review of such order or determination in the court of appeals of the United States, within any circuit wherein…”

Cumberland Capital Corp. v. Harris, 621 F.2d 246 (6th Cir. 1980). “15 U.S.C. § 1710 (a) (emphasis added) 3 .”

Commodore Props., Inc. v. Hills, 417 F. Supp. 1388 (D. Neb. 1976). “This determination by HUD is not subject to review by this Court as 15 U.S.C. § 1710 directs that appeals from an order or determination of the Secretary are to be addressed to the Circuit Court of Appeals.”

Marlow v. Samara Dev. Corp., 528 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). “§ 1710 , WHERE IT PROVIDES FOR COMPLETION WITHIN TWO YEARS BUT RESTRICTS THE BUYER'S REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF THE CONTRACT BY THE SELLERS TO A RETURN OF THE DEPOSIT OR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, OR MUST THE CONTRACT ALSO AFFORD THE BUYER THE ALTERNATIVE REMEDY OF A SUIT FOR DAMAGES?…”

Zachery v. Treasure Lake of Georgia, Inc.(GA.), 374 F. Supp. 251 (N.D. Ga. 1974). “Jurisdiction is conferred under 15 U.S.C. § 1710 . Presently pending are motions for summary judgment by two of the defendants.”

Scenic Rivers Ass'n v. Lynn, 520 F.2d 240 (10th Cir. 1975). “15 U.S.C. § 1710 (a). Thus, this Act provides for hearings on the request of a developer when the Secretary suspends the statement prior to its effective date for the purpose of obtaining additional information and, too, for review of an order of the Secretary when he wishes to…”

Cost Control Mktg. & Mgmt., Inc. v. Pierce, 687 F. Supp. 148 (M.D. Penn. 1987). · cites it 2× “Title 15 U.S.C. § 1710 holds in relevant part: Any person, aggrieved by an order or determination of the Secretary issued after a hearing, may obtain a review of such order or determination in the Court of Appeals of the United States, within any circuit wherein such person…”

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.