5 U.S.C. § 1010

Availability of transcripts

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Definition of Agency Proceeding.—In this section, the term “agency proceeding” has the meaning given the term in section 551 of this title.(b)Availability.—Agencies and advisory committees shall make available to any person, at actual cost of duplication, copies of transcripts of any agency proceeding or advisory committee meeting.(Pub. L. 117–286, § 3(a), Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4203.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

1010

5 U.S.C. App. (FACA § 11)

Pub. L. 92–463, § 11, Oct. 6, 1972, 86 Stat. 775.

In subsection (b), the words “Except where prohibited by contractual agreements entered into prior to the effective date of this Act [i.e., 90 days after October 6, 1972]” are omitted as obsolete.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases, 1948–1982 · leading case: United States v. L. A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc., 344 U.S. 33 (1952).
United States v. L. A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc., 344 U.S. 33 (1952). · cites it 2× “[2] 5 U. S. C. § 1010 . [3] 100 F. Supp. 432 .”
Ramspeck v. Fed. Trial Examiners Conf., 345 U.S. 128 (1953). · cites it 2× “244 , 5 U. S. C. § 1010 , sought a declaratory judgment that certain rules relating to their promotion, compensation, tenure, and the assignment of cases, promulgated by the Civil Service Commission pursuant to § 11, were invalid, and asked that their enforcement be enjoined.”
McEachern v. United States, 212 F. Supp. 706 (W.D.S.C. 1963). · cites it 3× “244 , 5 U.S.C. § 1010 . On October 20, 1961, the Social Security Administration commenced a proceeding against the plaintiff seeking his removal from the office of Hearing Examiner by filing a statement of charges against him with the Civil Service Commission and served a…”
Tractor Training Serv., a Corp., Tractor Training Serv., Inc., a Corp., & Joy E. Badley v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 227 F.2d 420 (9th Cir. 1955). · cites it 3× “11 of the Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1010 , provides in part that hearing examiners “shall be assigned to cases in rotation so far as practicable * * *” and § 8(a), 5 U.”
Bhd. of Ry., Airline, & S.S. Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employees v. St. Louis Sw. Ry. Co., 676 F.2d 132 (5th Cir. 1982). “The truck line had not raised this point before the examiner or the Commission, but had waited until it petitioned for relief in district court to press the issue. The district court invalidated the order because of this procedural defect.”
Borg-Johnson Elec., Inc. v. Christenberry, 169 F. Supp. 746 (S.D.N.Y. 1959). · cites it 3× “The Administrative Procedure Act Plaintiff asserts three grounds for finding that the Rules of Practice, Procedure and Organization of the Post Office Department under which the instant proceedings were conducted violate the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act: (a) In…”
Pinkett v. United States, 105 F. Supp. 67 (D. Maryland 1952). · cites it 2× “1951, requesting reopening and a hearing de novo on the ground that the Commission had enlarged the scope of authority granted beyond the scope of that sought in the application by adding Delaware as a state to be served, and, in addition, on the ground that examiner Culbertson…”
Cella v. United States, 208 F.2d 783 (7th Cir. 1953). “Consent orders suspending the dealer’s privileges were *786 issued in 23 cases, but in 29 cases, including the one now before us, an administrative hearing was held before a hearing examiner appointed under Section 11 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1010 . Five…”
Monumental Motor Tours, Inc. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 929 (D. Maryland 1953). · cites it 2× “On N07 vember 22, 1951 Monumental again filed a petition for reconsideration and for further hearing on several grounds-, raising for the first time the contention that the whole proceeding was invalid because the examiner who conducted the hearing was not qualified under § 11…”
Clement L. McEachern v. United States, 321 F.2d 31 (4th Cir. 1963). “Appointment of examiners is provided in § 11 of the Act 5 U.S.C. § 1010 , as follows: “Appointment of examiners; assignment, removal and compensation; jurisdiction of Civil Service Commission “Subject to the civil-service and other laws to the extent not inconsistent with this…”
Twin City Freight, Inc. v. United States, 360 F. Supp. 709 (D. Minnesota 1972). “Since Appellee had failed to object or protest at the administrative hearing, the Court held that all rights to object to such proceedings were waived.”
Fed. Home Loan Bank Bd. v. Long Beach Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 295 F.2d 403 (9th Cir. 1961). “It is provided in section 11 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1010 , that agencies occasionally or temporarily insufficiently staffed “may utilize examiners selected by the [Civil Service] Commission from and with the consent of other agencies.”
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.