Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
![Page 1: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
CRS REPORT FOR CONGRESS
SYNOPOSES OF REPORTED D E C I S I O N S OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D I S T R I C T O F COLUMBIA C I R C U I T I N WHICH JUDGE ROBERT HERON BORK
AUTHORIZED A S I G N E D O P I N I O N OR OTHER STATEMENT 1982 - 1987
by P a u l L. M o r g a n A m e r i c a n Law D i v i s i o n L e g i s l a t i v e A t t o r n e y
A u g u s t 13, 1987
![Page 2: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The Congressional Research Service works exclusively for the Congress. conducting research, analyzing legislation, and providing information at the request of committees, Mem- bers, and their staffs.
The Service makes such research available, without parti- san bias, in many forms including studies, reports, compila- tions, digests, and background briefings. Upon request, CRS assists committees in analyzing legislative proposals and issues, and in assessing the possible effects of these proposals and their alternatives. The Service's senior specialists and subject analysts are also available for personal consultations in their respective fields of expertise.
![Page 3: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
ABSTRACT
During t h e pe r iod h e has served on the United S t a t e s Court of Appeals f o r
t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia C i r c u i t , 1982 t o t h e p r e s e n t , Judge Bork has au thored
a s igned opin ion o r o t h e r s t a t emen t i n more than 160 c a s e s . Those c a s e s have
been summarized t o i nc lude t h e d e c i s i o n af t h e lower t r i b u n a l , t h e D i s t r i c t of
Coltnnbia C i r c u i t r u l i n g and p r i n c i p a l i s s u e s upon which t h e r u l i n g was based.
![Page 4: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
SIGN
ED OPI
NION
S AUTliORED BY JU
DGE BO
RK
CITATION
682 F.2d
1018 (1982)
STYL
E OF C
ASE
Richey Man
or, In
c. v.
Schwei
ker
Athe
ns Com
muni
ty Hosp.,
Inc. v.
Schw
eike
r
McCl
am v.
Barr
y
Devi
ne v.
Whi
te
~c~ehee
v. C.I.A.
Cosg
rove
v.
Smfth
Vand
er Jag
t v. O'Neill
U.S. v. Lewis
-
OPIN
ION
MA
J . C
ONC
. DIS .
LEGAL ISSUES INVOLVED
IN C
ASE
Affi
rman
ce of con
vict
ion for distribution of a controlled
substance. Absent a
'demonstrable ne
ed,
loca
tion of police surveillance post may be withheld. Grand
supported by evidence.
Failure of trial judge to
reouested by defense, not plain -.
decision disallowing medicare reimbursement for
cert
ain co
sts incurred i
n the purchase and operation of health care facility
resu
ltin
g in cha
nge of
sta
tus of facility from for-profit to not-forLprofit.
Reve
rsal
and remand of dist. ct.orrler reauiring Medicare Provider Reimbr~rsement
Revi
ew Board to rev
iew ce
rtain matters concerning medicare
reauest fo
reim
burs
emen
t. Held: Ju
dicial review available for final decision of Board but
Board
had
no iurisdic&i~~ t
or
ev
ie
v-
timeuly_filed.
Affi
rman
ce of di
stri
ct court which upheld decision of Commissioner of Food
and
Drug
Adm
inis
trat
ion to extend provisional listings of certain color additives.
I I
I --
. -- - -
x
IDiatrict co
urt dismissed
auit against District of Columbia, certain officials.
and va
riou
s police off
icer
s. Decision affirmed in part. reversed in part, and
rema
nded
based upon cir
cuit court's interpretation of various statutes of
1 llimitation.
-- -
Arbi
trat
or's
dec
isio
n in adverse action case set aside upon petition by Office
of Per
sonn
el Management.
Under circumstances oE case, determination of
stan-
I I
ldards to be
followed by
arbitrator, remand would do justice betqen parties
with
out unduly bur
deni
na arbitral process,
Reve
rsal
of di
stri
ct cou
rt decision granting sumnary judgment to C.I.A.
in
journalist's ac
tion
to co
mpel Agency
to respond to his reauest
for certain
reco
rds under
the Fr
eedo
m of Information Act.
Remanded for determination of
appl
icat
ion of
rev
ised
federal parole guidelines to male District of Columbia
pris
oner
s as
sign
ed to
federal prisons. Remanded for resolution of factual mat-
I I
-.
]courts ma
y de
clar
e ru
les constitutionally infirm, sep.-of powers precluded
act.
x I
l~ffirmance of con
vict
ion of possession of unregistered
firearm. Government's
x
I evid
ence
suf
fici
ent to sus
tain conviction for possession of s
awed-off shotgun.
ters.
---
- Af
firm
ance
of dis
miss
al of complaint brought by
fourteen Republican members of
the Ro
use of Rep
rese
ntat
ives a1,leging that
the Houae Democratic leadership
assi
gned
them
fewer co
mmittee seats
than vroportionallv owed.
While federal
CR
S - 1
![Page 6: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
SIGNED OPINIONS AUTHORED BY
JUDGE BORK
-
'07 F.2d 1443 (1983) ;
:ert. den. 464 U.S.
008 (1983)
69 F.2d
95 (1983);
re
.n pt, af Cd in pt, 471
I.S. 159 (1985)
OPINION
STYLE OF CASE
. MN
_. C
ONC
. DIS
LEGAL ISSUES I
NVNED IN CASE
:rowley v. Shultz
Ix I
1 i~ecision reverses in part andfirms in pariaSstrict court's approval of
Iffice of Com. oE United Ch.
of
:hris
t v. F.C.C.
Loveday v. F.C.C.
1
v. C.I.A.
York
v. Merit Systems protection1
x
Planned Parenthood Federation of
America, Inc. v. Heckler
Frantz v.
U.S
.
ICBC Corp. v. F.C.C.
v. Exxon Core.
x
special master's
finding that attorney fees should be awarded in suit agalnst
State DeparLment. Question was appealable and fees were barred by savings
clause of Back Pay Act.
Separate statement by Bork, J., clarifying decision.
-
-
Orders of F.C.C.
deregulating commercial radio industry affirmed in part and
remanded in part.
Commission imposition on licensees of obligation to pro-
vide programming responsive to community issues was reasonable as standard but
reasoning behind elimination of p
romam Loas
inadeouate.
Affirmance of F.C.C.
decision that California radio and
television stations
adequately discharged obligation to investigate and identify true sponsor of
certain political advertisements. F.C.C. did not abuse discretion or
act
arhttrerilv or caori_ciouslv in decision.
Affirming in part and vacating in part district court granting of preliminary
injunctive relief to prevent city from cutting off funds for support of sheltet
for homeless. Lower court properly found that due process renuirements met but
ouestion of proper scope of judicial review not ripe for decision by-thgt
court
Reversal and remand of district court decision concerning what information Ager
had
to provide under Freedom of Information Act reouest for names of individual
and
institutions that conducted certain secret research. At issue was defini-
tion of term "intelligence source" and
if info, available from u
~s
sourceg,
Roard'sdecision upholding Postal Service dismissal of employee remanded so
Board could formulate standards for its actions in granting petitions for
reconsideration of earlier decisions.
\
--
Affirmance of district court injunction prohibiting enforcement of regulations
issued by Department of Health and Human Services which were in excess of
statutory authority. Inter alia, regulations renuired notification of parents
or guardians when prescribing contraceptives to unemancipated minors.
Supplem?rltal opinion to Frantz v.
%,7
07
F.2d 582 (D.C.Clr 1983). Reverses
district court dismissal of suit against administrators of federal witness
program for interfering with child visitation rights of noncustodial parent
whose children, with ex-wife are enrolled in program.
Affirming om
m mi
ssio
n's decision rejecting renuest for waiver u
f rule designed
to prevent interference anwng AM
atations. Policy under whlch the black mmed
and oriented station's reouest was rejected was not arbitrary and capricious.
--
Affirming district court's summary judgment for Exxon which moved, &~ring
plaintlf€'s pendency of appeal from felony conviction, to
terminate his Exxon
franchise pursuant to Petroleum Marketing Practices Act.
Fact of convic t ion
and
lo? vsrncity of conviction held to be basis for statutory terminatiol.
---
CR
S - 2
![Page 7: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
Unl
OR
ED
BY
JU
DG
E BO
RK
CIT
AT
ION
71
7 F
.2d
6
02
(1
98
3)
719
F.2
d
40
7
(19
83
);
ce
rt.
den
. 4
67
U.S
. 1
25
5
(19
84
) ,
720
F.2
d
70
5
(19
83
) ;
ze
rt.
den
. 4
65
U
.S.
LO37
(1
98
4)
720
F.2
d
13
55
(1
98
3);
:e
rt.
de
n.
46
7
U.S
. 12
51
(19
84
)
121
F.
2d
36
6
(19
83
)
STY
LE
OF
CA
SE
Fri
en
ds
Fo
r A
11
Ch
ild
ren
v.
Lo
ckh
eed
A
irc
raft
Co
rp.
McB
rid
e v
. M
err
ell
Dow
an
d
Ph
arm
ac
eu
tic
als
In
c.
Mo
srie
v.
Rarr
y
Bla
ck
Cit
ize
ns
Fo
r A
Fa
ir M
edia
v
. F
.C.C
.
Von
A
ulo
ck v
. Sm
ith
Kan
sas
Sta
te N
etw
ork
, In
c.
v.
F.C
.C.
U.S
. v
. G
arr
ett
-
Cro
ck
ett
v.
Rea
gan
Yel
low
Ta
xi
Co.
O
f M
inn
ea
po
lis
v.
N.L
.R.B
.
Jay
ve
e B
ran
d,
Inc
. v
. U
.S.
LEG
AL
ISS
UE
S
INV
OLV
ED IN
CA
SE
Aff
irm
ing
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
en
ial
of
mo
tio
n
to d
ism
iss
su
it o
n
foru
m n
on
co
nv
en-
ien
s g
rou
nd
s.
Cla
ims
bro
ug
ht
ag
ain
st L
ock
hee
d
for
Inju
rie
s s
uff
ere
d
in c
rash
in
Sa
igo
n d
uri
ng
19
75
"O
pe
rati
on
B
ab
yli
ft."
R
ela
tiv
e e
ase
in
ob
tain
ing
pro
of
and
in
tere
st
in U
.S.
in r
eta
inin
rr ~
q-
du
~i
nv
ol
ve
me
ut
~x
ai
hd
--
A
ffir
min
g i
n p
art
an
d
rev
ers
ing
in
pa
rt d
istr
jct
co
urt
dis
mis
sal
of
lib
el
ac
tio
n b
rou
gh
t by
e
xp
ert
wit
ne
ss
all
eg
ing
de
fam
ati
on
in
mag
azin
e a
rti
cle
ab
ou
t FD
A
he
ari
ng
s in
wh
ich
p
lain
tiff
te
sti
fie
d.
Pla
inti
ff h
ad
als
o t
es
tifi
ed
in
F
lori
da
kn
de
cti
n b
irth
de
fec
t tr
ial.
A
ffir
min
g d
istr
ict
co
urt
in
civ
il r
igh
ts
ac
tio
n.
Dis
tric
t o
f C
olu
mb
ia p
oli
ce
o
ffic
er
was
n
ot
de
pri
ve
d o
f an
y
lib
ert
y i
nte
res
t w
hen
he
was
p
ub
lic
ly
cr
itlc
-
ize
d p
rio
r to
his
tra
ns
fer
and
th
us
was
n
ot
en
titl
ed
to
du
e p
roc
ess
pro
tec
tio
n
!wfo
re t
ran
sfe
r.
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
F.C
.C.
ord
er
ad
op
tin
g s
imp
lifi
ed
re
ne
wa
l a
pp
lic
ati
on
fo
r ra
dio
an
d
tele
vis
ion
bro
ad
ca
st
lic
en
see
s.
New
sy
ste
m w
as
ad
en
ua
te t
o p
erm
it
F.C
.C.
to d
ete
rmin
e
tha
t li
ce
ns
e r
enew
al
in t
he
pu
bli
c i
nte
res
t.
Co
mm
issi
on
, in
mak
- in
^ d
ec
igio
n.
ad
ea
ua
tely
c
om
~fi
ed
wit
h A
dm
in
~a
tl
ve
Uo
ab
ur
~
Ac
t and
Cp
rrm
~_
i
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ism
issa
l o
f s
uit
bro
ug
ht
by
C
orm
er
and
c
urr
en
t em
plo
yee
s a
lle
gin
g t
ha
t a
n E
EOC
inte
rpre
tati
ve
bu
lle
tin
au
tho
riz
ed
em
plo
yer
s t
dis
cri
min
ate
on
ba
sis
of
ag
e w
hen
ma
inta
inin
g p
en
sio
n p
lan
s.
Pla
inti
ff
s l
ac
k
sta
nd
inp
to
ch
all
en
ge
bu
lle
tin
wh
ere
iniu
ry n
ot
fair
ly t
rac
ea
ble
to
it.
A
ffir
min
g C
om
mis
sio
n's
d
en
ial
of
an
ap
pli
ca
tio
n
for
a
tax
ce
rti
fic
ate
en
titl
in
sta
tio
n o
wn
ers
to f
av
ora
ble
tre
atm
en
t u
nd
er
the
I.R
.S.
Cod
e.
F.C
.C.
de
cis
ion
w
as
rati
on
al
and
wit
hin
sc
op
e o
f it
s a
uth
ori
ty.
\
--
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
co
nv
icti
on
fo
r a
idin
g a
nd
a
be
ttin
g t
ran
spo
rta
tio
n
of
min
or
inte
r s
tate
fo
r p
urp
ose
of
pro
hib
ite
d s
ex
ua
l c
on
du
ct
for
co
mn
erc
ial
ex
plo
ita
tio
n.
Sp
eed
y T
ria
l A
ct
pro
per
1.y
a
pp
lie
d,
ele
me
nts
of
off
en
se p
rov
en
. D
efen
dan
t f
aik
to
pro
ve
wit
hd
raw
al
fro
m c
on
spir
ac
y.
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ism
issa
l o
f s
uit
by
29
mem
bers
o
f C
on
gre
ss a
ga
in
st
the
Pre
sid
en
t an
d
oth
er
of
fic
ials
ch
all
en
gin
g
leg
ali
ty o
f U
nit
ed
Sta
tes
p
rese
nc
e
in,
and
mil
ita
ry a
ss
ista
nc
e t
o,
El
Sa
lva
do
r.
No
nju
stic
iab
le p
oli
tic
a
qu
est
ion
. p
lain
tif
f's
d
isp
ute
pri
ma
rily
wit
h f
ell
ow
le
gis
lato
rs.
Re
ve
rsa
l o
f B
oa
rd's
d
ec
isio
n t
ha
t c
ab
dri
ve
rs w
ho
dro
ve
ta
xis
un
der
le
as
e w
hlcl
e
xp
ress
ly p
rov
ide
d
tha
t th
ey
wer
e in
de
pe
nd
en
t c
on
tra
cto
rs w
ere
ne
ve
rth
ele
ss
emp
loy
ees
wit
hin
mea
nin
g o
f th
e L
abo
r R
ela
tio
ns
Ac
t.
No
sig
nif
ica
nt
com
pany
c
on
tro
l o
ve
r d
riv
ers
to
ju
sti
fy
emp
loy
ee s
tatu
s.
Aff
irm
ing
dis
tric
t d
ism
issa
l o
f s
uit
ag
ain
st U
.S..
C
onsu
mer
P
rod
uc
t S
afe
tv C
orm
- -
and
fi
ve
fo
rmer
mem
bers
o
f C
m.
fo
r lo
ss
es
ca
use
d b
y
the
ba
nn
ing
of
ce
rta
in
fla
me
re
tard
an
t co
mpo
und.
N
o ju
ris
dic
tio
n
un
de
r T
ort
Cla
ims
Act
fo
r su
ch
a
su
it.
Mem
bers
o
f C
omm
. im
un
e f
rom
su
it f
or
of
fic
ial
ac
tio
ns.
CR
S - 3
![Page 8: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
SIGN
ED OPI
NION
S AU~IOKED RY
JUDGE ROR
K
142 F.2d 1498 (1984);
:ert.
den. 471 U
.S. lL17:
(1985)
144 F.2d 827 (1984) ;
:ert. den. 4
70 U
.S.
loah (1985)
STYL
E OF C
ASE
Nathan v.
Sm
ith
Inte
rnat
iona
l Pa
per Co
. v.
F.E.R.C.
Cow
in v. Br
esle
r
Oil,
Che
mica
l and At
omic
Wor
kers
In
tern
atio
nal Un
ion v. Am
eric
an
Cy anamid Com
pany
Dron
enbu
rg v. @
Athens Co
mmun
ity Ho
spit
al, Inc.
v. Sc
hwei
ker
P &
R Te
mmer
v.
F.C.C.
Donovan v. Wi
llia
ms Ent
erpr
laes
,
City of New Yor
k Mu
nici
ple Broad
casting Sy
stem
v.
F.C.C.
OPIN
ION
MA
J . C
ONG
DIS .
LEGAL ISSUES INVOLVED IN CASE
Reve
rsal
of district cou
rt order requiring Attorney General
to c
onduct prelim-
inary in
vest
igat
ion under Ethics in Government Act into charges against vario:ls
from hyd
roel
ectr
ic licensing r
eauirments of the Federal Power Act.
Commission
llacked au
thor
ity to vac
ate exemptions it had previously issued.
I Di
stri
ct cou
rt dec
isio
n affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded. Minor-
ity sh
areh
olde
rs' cl
aims
regarding breach of fiduciary duties'by majority must
he bro
ught
der
ivat
ivel
y. Pleadings supported claim for appointment of receiver.
Reli
ance
not
a pr
ereq
uisi
te to standing in case of-deceptive
proxv
solicitation
Affi
rmed
ord
er by
Occu
pati
onal Safety and Health Review Commission which affirm
ed ad
mini
stra
tive
law
judge's decision that employer's policy of giving
fertile
wome
n wo
rkin
g in con
diti
ons unsafe for women of childbearing age choice of bei
ster
iliz
ed or
losing job
s not cognizable under Occupational Safetv a
n_d_He_alut.
Affi
rman
ce of dis
tric
t co
urt summary judgment for Navy
in action by admitted
homo
sexu
al see
king
to en
join his discharge.
District court had subject matter
juri
sdic
tion
. No
con
stit
utional right to engage in homosexual conduct. Policy
of man
dato
ry dis
char
ge justified by
nu
needs of military. 1
x En ban
c re
vers
al and remand of district court. Noncompliance with notice o
f
clai
ms pro
visi
on in D.C.
Code does not bar federal claims.
Enactments of Cong-
ress
app
lica
ble only to D.C.
are to be
treated as local law interacting with
! I -
! I
Ifed
eral
-law
as wo
uld
the laws of the states.
\
kffirming dis
tric
t co
urt de
cision on rehearing.
Provider Reimbursement Review
F oard
la
cks ju
risd
icti
on to consider costs fo;
which medicare provider
seeks
eimb
urse
ment
but
had
no
t included in original cost report.
!I ~ffirmance of F.C.C.
deci
sions revoking authorization to operate trunked
radi
o comunications systems. No abuse of discretion as
comp
ly with conditions.
Comlssim -7
did not abuse discretion
I I
Iby de
nyin
g temporary wa
iver
of rules.
--
x I
IAffirmance in
part
and re
versal in part of Occupational Safety and Health
Revi
Comm
issi
on ord
er rel
ativ
e to citatibns issued
tb'contractor fbr safety violation
11
1
hile
wor
king
on Har
t Of
fice Building. Contractor
failed to establish
defense
I for ex
posi
ng emp
loye
es to
fall hazards.
Citation properly
hpictr?d.as willful.
&I-kftirmance
of C
mmission decision to terminate special exemption gtuen
statiqn
CRS - 5
I! si
nce 1943 to e
limi
nate
its nighttime codhannel interference with a Minneapolis
class-I cle
ar-c
hhnn
el station.
Case pending at F.C.C. since 1954. Evldence
supp
orte
d de
clsi
on whi
ch wns not arhltrary. etc. o
r not 111 accordance ---.I with law.
![Page 10: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
SIGN
ED OPI
NION
S AUTIIORED BY
JUDGE BOR
K
OPIN
ION
LTATIQN-
public benefit
and De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity v.
F.E.R.C.
746 F.2d 886
(1984)
National Cla
ssif
icat
ion committe~ x
746 F.2d 1492 (1984)
Nati
onal
Ass
ocia
tion
of Re
gula-
tory Utility Com
miss
ione
rs v.
746 F.2d
1503
Wash
ingt
on Ilospital Cen
ter v.
x
Serv
ice Employees In
tern
atio
nal
I Iunion. Local
722, AL
Bost
on Car
rier
, In
c. v.
I.C.C.
x
746 F.2d 15
79 (1984)
I 747 F.2d 763
(1984);
cert. di
em. 473 U.S.
'747 F.2d
1493 (1984)
I I
.- -
Dron
enbu
rg v. Zech
Midd
le Sou
th Ene
rgy,
Inc
., v.
F.E.R.C.
F.2d 893 (1984)
corporation's
appl
icat
ion for a
license for a hydroelectric project. Commissio~
acted
arbi
trar
ily and ca
pric
iously in applying new rule which
took efCect while
a~~lication
was
endi inn.
-
Affi
rman
ce of 1.C.C or
der in
terpreting agreement between motor carriers pro-
vidi
ng for co
llec
tive
act
ion in freight classification matters. Decision was
supp
orte
d by the re
cord
and was not arbitrary or capricious. Order did not
oper
ate re
troa
ctiv
ely to ex-
tg
-w
I i ty
fnr n
lpt-
Affi
rman
ce of Com
miss
ion or
der prohibiting restrictions on
the resale and
shar
ing of all
int
erst
ate WA
TS service used in exclusively interstate communi-
cations. Co
mmis
sion
had au
thority, under the Comnunications Act, to regulate
serv
ice and de
cisi
on, re
lyin
g on the record, was not arbitrary or capricious.
Affi
rmin
g in par
t and re
vers
ing in part district court order concerning arbtt-
rati
on of ce
rtai
n grievances.
Refusal
to a
rbitrate in one instance was
suffic-
iently fr
ivol
ous to ju
stif
y aw
arding of attorney fees but
employer had suffic-
x
x
Amer
ican
Emp
loye
rs Ins
uran
ce Co.
v. Am
eric
an Security Ba
nk, N.A.
EDF.Zd970(1984);
cert. den. 471 U.S.
1127 (1985)
ient cas
e au
thor
ity to se
ek review of another decision so-no attorne~cee award
Affi
rman
ce of Com
miss
ion de
nial of application for motor carrier authority.
Noti
ces se
nt to ca
rrie
r by Com
mission were sufficient.
former employees were
properly al
lowe
d to pr
otes
t application, and evidence supported denial of
t
x
tebr
on v
. Wa
shin
gton
Met
ropo
lita
r~
Area
Tra
nsit
Aut
hori
ty
--
--
rehe
aring en b
an~
of decision in 741 F.2d
1388, aupra.
x
0llmanv.Evans
- -.
---
-
Fede
ral Energy Reg
ulat
ory ~omniesion's order suspending initial rqte schedule
vacated
and
remanded.
Comm
ission does not have authority to suspend initial
rate
schedule. Cwrt can
not
legislate to remedy gap that language. legislativ
history
and
long
stan
ding
int
erpretation establish as Dart of statutory schsme.
Affi
rmin
g di
stri
ct cou
rt dec
ision in which a bank prevailed
in suit seeking
an acc
ount
ing by
borrower's
surety of certain receipts and
expenditures as
requ
ired
by
a tr
ust agreement. Bank's request for attorney fees denied.
x
---
'decision refusing to compel transit authority
to
disp
lay artist's po
ster
cri
tical of Reagbn administration.
Refusal
to display
poster was
a cl
ear-
cut and
impermissible prior restraint and violation of right
-c fr
ee speech.
--
- ~~firmance
of dis
tric
t co
urt decfsion in favor of two newspaper columnist's whom
a po
liti
cal sc
ienc
e pr
ofes
sor alleged had
defamed him with result that he was
deni
ed a nom
inat
ion as dep
artm
ent chairman at
the University of Maryland.
Stat
ment
s we
re con
stit
utio
nall
y protected
expressio~s of opinlon. -
--
CR
S - 6
![Page 11: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
L1TI
IORE
D
BY
JUD
GE
BORK
CK
TATI
ON
E0
P.2
d 1
03
9 (
19
84
)
F.2
d
69
4
(19
85
) P
ara
lyz
ed
Ve
tera
ns
of
Am
eric
a v
. C
.A.B
.
OPI
NIO
N
DIS
.
La
AL
IS
SU
ES
IN
VO
LVED
IN
CA
SE
up
\Aff
irm
ance
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ism
issa
l o
f F
ed
era
l T
ort
Cla
ims
Act
a
cti
on
s d
ue
tc
I I
I I
153
F.2
d
12
0 (
19
85
) ls
ierr
a C
lub
v.
U.S
. D
epar
tmen
t 04
x
I
I Tra
nsp
ort
ati
on
I
755
F.2
d
94
1
(19
85
);
v.
N.L
.R.B
. :e
rt.
den
. 54
U
.S.L
.W.
156
F.2
d
18
1 (
19
85
);
Ca
tre
tt v
. Jo
hn
s-M
anv
ille
S
ale
s :e
v.
54 U
.S.L
.W.
47
75
C
orp
ora
tio
n
(19
86
) [S
ee
: N
o.
83
- [A
ug.
7.
19
87
)in
fr; ]
757
F.2
d
12
97
(1
98
5)
Wil
son
v.
Goo
d H
umor
C
orp
ora
tio
n
758
F.2
d
73
3
(19
85
) F
arm
ers
Ex
po
rt
Com
pany
v.
U.S
.
759
F.2
d
21
(19
85
);
va
c,B
arn
es
v.
3ub
nom
v
. B
arn
es
i5 U
.S.L
.W.
41
03
(1
98
7)
.---
--,
I
759
F.2
d
17
6
(19
85
) v
. S
ing
leto
n
imp
rop
er v
enu
e.
Re
ve
rsa
l o
f d
istr
4c
t c
ou
rt d
ism
issa
l o
f c
on
sti
tuti
on
al
and
p
en
de
nt
sta
te l
aw c
laim
s a
ga
inst
tw
o c
orp
ora
te d
efe
nd
an
ts.
May
b
rin
g a
cti
on
€01
upon
v
iola
tio
n o
f c
on
sti
tuti
on
al
rig
hts
r~
nrl
sr U
iven
s p
rtn
cip
ls.
_ Ju
dg
e B
ork
n
ot
a m
embe
r o
f d
ec
isio
n p
an
el.
D
isse
nt
is t
o d
en
ial
of
atr
gg
est
ion
F
or
reh
ea
rin
g
en
ban
c.
De
cis
ion
all
ow
ed
C.A
.B.
to m
ake
reg
ula
tio
ns
un
der
th
e
Re
ha
ltil
ita
tio
n A
ct
of
19
73
pe
rta
inin
g
to a
ll
air
lin
es
, n
ot
jus
t th
ose
re
ce
ivin
g
dir
ec
t fe
de
ral
as
sis
tan
ce
. D
isse
nt
sune
este
d.a>
- nnt
En
lb
F
ed
era
l A
via
tio
n A
dm
inis
tra
tio
n o
rde
rs a
llo
win
g u
se o
f J
et
air
-
I pla
ne
s a
t a
irp
ort
L
oca
ted
wit
hin
a
na
tio
na
l p
ark
. No
v
iola
tio
n o
f N
ati
on
al
En
vir
on
men
tal
Po
lic
y A
ct.
x
Rem
and
for
rec
on
sid
era
tio
n o
f o
rde
r o
f N
ati
on
al
Lab
or
Re
lati
on
s B
oar
d w
hic
h
reje
cte
d u
nfa
ir
lab
or
pra
cti
ce
ch
arg
e b
y fi
red
em
plo
yee
. T
ruck
dri
ve
r a
lle
ge
d
tha
t h
e h
ad
bee
n
dis
ch
arg
ed
fo
r re
fus
ing
to
dri
ve
un
safe
ve
hic
le a
nd
re
po
rtin
g
co
nd
itio
n
to s
tate
au
tho
riti
es
. B
oar
d
de
cie
ion
lla
w.~
lac
k_
ofr
ati
on
ale
. x
Re
ve
rsa
l an
d
rem
and
o
f d
istr
ict
co
urt
de
cis
ion
gra
nti
ng
sum
mar
y ju
dg
men
t t?
a
sbe
sto
s m
an
ufa
ctu
rer
in w
ron
gfu
l d
ea
th s
uit
bro
ug
ht
by w
idow
all
eg
ing
th
at
hu
sba
nd
's
de
ath
re
su
lte
d
fro
m e
xp
osu
re
to p
rod
uc
t.
Ma
nu
fac
ture
r's
mo
vin
g
pap
err
pa
ten
tly
de
fec
tiv
e o
n
fac
e r
en
de
rin
p.
inappro
pri
ate
th
e a
.um
m_~
-e~L
Aff
irm
an
ce
in
pa
rt a
nd
re
ve
rsa
l an
d
rem
and
in
pa
rt o
f d
istr
ict
co
urt
dir
ec
ted
v
erd
ict
in f
av
or
of
com
pany
. T
hre
e y
ea
r o
ld k
ille
d b
y
au
to w
hen
r,~
nn
ing
ac
ross
s
tre
et
to i
ce
cre
am
tru
ck
. Ju
ry
sho
uld
ha
ve
de
cid
ed
wh
eth
er
com
pany
sh
ou
ld h
av
kn
own
of
sp
ec
ial
ris
ks
it
s o
pera
tin
^
pro
ce
du
re c
ou
ld c
rea
te
fow
ch
ild
ren
. A
ffir
ma
nc
e o
f d
istr
ict
co
urt
de
cis
ion
co
nv
icti
ng
de
fen
da
nt
oE
mak
ing
fa
lse
st
ate
me
nt
on
pa
ssp
ort
a
pp
lic
ati
on
. E
xc
lusi
on
ary
ru
le d
id n
ot
ap
ply
to
se
arc
h
and
s
eiz
ure
mad
e b
y
Bri
tis
h p
oli
ce
off
ice
rs i
n E
ng
lan
d
ab
sen
t p
art
icip
ati
on
\,y
1I
.S.
au
tho
riti
es
. E
vid
ence
su
pp
ort
ed
co
nv
icti
on
. i
s m
issa
l in
pa
rt a
nd
a
ffir
ma
nc
e
in p
art
of
Inte
rsta
te C
omne
rce
Co
mm
issi
on
's
refu
sa
l to
re
co
nsi
de
r tw
o d
ec
isio
ns.
O
ne
pe
titi
on
dis
mis
sed
as
de
cis
ion
of
I.C
.C.
no
t fi
na
l.
Sec
on
d d
ec
islo
n a
ffir
me
d
as
no
e
de
nu
ate
sh
ow
ing
mad
e o
f n
ate
ria
l e
rro
r,
new
e
vid
en
ce
or
su
bs
tan
tia
lly
ch
ang
ed
cir
cu
ms
ta~
es
. x
Re
ve
rsa
l an
d
rem
and
o
f d
istr
ict
co
urt
de
cis
ion
fo
r d
efe
nd
an
ts
in s
uit
by
d
iv6
rs
Yem
bers
an
d O
ffic
ers
of
Co
ng
ress
se
ek
ing
nu
llif
ica
tio
n o
f a
po
ck
et
ve
to.
Pla
in
tif
fs
had
st
an
din
g;
dis
pu
te n
ot
bey
on
d
co
urt
's
au
tho
rity
b
ec
au
se
pa
rtie
s w
ere
lco
ord
ina
te b
ran
ch
es
of
go
ver
nm
ent.
P
oc
ke
t v
ek
ipv
ali
d u
nd
er
cir
cu
mst
an
ce
s.
IRev
ersa
l an
d
rem
and
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n s
up
pre
ss i
n^
ev
ide
nc
e.
Pre
vio
us
. .
- p
an
el
of
Co
urt
o
f A
pp
eals
had
he
ld
tha
t c
ert
ain
ev
ide
nc
e w
as
reli
ab
le a
nd
re
men
ded
c
ase
. T
his
de
cis
ion
pre
ve
nte
d
the
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt
fro
m s
up
pre
ssin
g
tha
t e
vid
en
ce
.
CRS - 7
![Page 12: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
UTH
ORE
D
BY
JUD
GE
BORK
76
8 F
.2d
3
63
(1
98
5);
c
ert
. d
en
. 5
5 U
.S.L
.W
32
57
(1
98
6)
STY
LE
OF
CA
SE
inso
n v
. T
ay
lor
-
T-
F.C
.C.
U.S
. v
. S
ing
leto
n
-
OPI
NIO
N
Wei
sber
g v
. U
.S.
Dep
artm
ent
of
Just
ic
e
Mar
yla
nd
D
epar
tmen
t o
f ll
uman
R
eso
urc
es v
. D
epar
tmen
t o
f H
ea
lth
an
d
Hum
an
Se
rvic
es
U.S
. v
. Ja
mes
-
x
I.C
.C.
tee
v.
U.S
.
CON
C
X
Cit
ize
ns
Co
ord
ina
tin
g C
om
mit
tee
x
LE
CI\L I
WQ
WlE
ILL
NC
AS
E
rudg
e B
ork
n
ot
a m
embe
r o
f d
ec
isio
n
pa
ne
l.
Dis
sen
t is
to
de
nia
l o
e s
ug
ge
stio
n
on
Fri
en
dsh
ip
He
igh
ts,
Inc
. v
. W
ash
ing
ton
Me
tro
po
lita
n
Are
a T
ran
sit
Au
tho
rity
N
orf
olk
& W
este
rn R
ailw
ay
Co.
v.
U
.S.
- ~
f re
he
ari
ng
e
n b
anc.
O
rig
ina
l c
irc
uit
de
cis
ion
, 7
53
F.2
d
14
1
(19
85
) a
ffir
me
d
tnd
rem
and
ed,
54
U.S
.L.W
. 4
70
3
(19
86
).
Co
nce
rned
se
xu
al
ha
rra
ssm
en
t a
lle
ga
tio
n
x
md
er
Ti
~l
e
VI
I o
f C
ivil
Rig
hts
Act
o
f 1
96
4.
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
Co
mm
issi
on
ord
er
es
tab
lis
hin
g a
pri
va
te c
irri
e;<
agin
g
syst
em
as
a
new
li
ce
ns
e c
las
sif
ica
tio
n t
o o
pe
rate
wit
hin
th
e p
riv
ate
la
nd
mo
bil
e ra
dio
se
rvic
es.
De
nia
l o
f su
gg
est
ion
fo
r re
he
ari
ng
e
n b
anc
of
75
9 F
.2d
1
76
, su
pra
.
Fe
de
ral
Co
urt
s Im
pro
vem
ent
Act
o
f 1
98
2 d
id n
ot
div
ea
t th
is c
ou
rt o
f ju
ris
dic
- ti
on
ov
er
Fre
edo
m
of
Info
rma
tio
n A
ct
ca
se t
ha
t c
on
tain
ed
a
les
s s
ub
sta
nti
al
co
ntr
ac
t c
laim
ag
ain
st
the
Dep
artm
ent
of
Ju
sti
ce
s
inc
e n
oti
ce
of
ap
pe
al
in t
he
c
ase
was
fi
led
pri
or
to t
he
eff
ec
tiv
e d
ate
of
the
lc
t.
-
--
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n u
ph
old
ing
HllS
v
ind
ing
th
at
Mar
yla
nd
h
ad
mis
spe
nt
fed
era
l g
ran
t m
on
ies.
D
istr
ict
co
urt
had
fe
de
ral
qu
est
ion
ju
ris
dic
- ti
on
. H
IIS
de
term
ina
tio
n w
as
no
t a
rbit
rary
or
ca
pri
cio
us
and
H
HS
had
s
tatu
tory
ri
gh
t o
f re
co
ve
ry o
f m
isa
pp
lie
d
fun
ds.
--..
-- - -
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt c
on
vic
tio
n f
orp
os
se
ss
ion
of
co
ca
ine
, m
ari
jua
na
, an
d
ph
en
cy
cli
din
e.
Po
lic
e p
roc
ed
ure
s s
ati
sfi
ed
re
ou
ire
me
nts
o
f fe
de
ral
kn
ock
an
d
ann
ou
nce
s
tatu
te.
Ev
iden
ce
sup
po
rte
d c
on
vic
tio
n.
. .
-- - L
Ch
all
en
ge
s to
fo
ur
fin
al
ord
ers
of
the
I.C
.C.
rela
tiv
e
to t
he
No
rth
ea
st R
ail
S
erv
ice
s w
ere
wit
hin
th
e e
xc
lusi
ve
Ju
ris
dic
tio
n o
f S
pe
cia
l C
ou
rt,
Re
gio
na
l R
ail
Re
org
an
iza
tio
n A
ct
and
wer
e tr
an
sfe
rre
d t
he
reto
. --
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
I.C
.C.
ac
tio
n r
ev
isin
g t
he
na
tio
na
l m
oto
r fr
eig
ht
cla
ss
ific
ati
on
sy
stem
. P
roc
ed
ura
l g
ua
ran
tee
s o
f A
dm
inis
tra
tiv
e P
roc
ed
ure
Act
met
. C
om
mis
sio
a
cte
d p
rop
erl
y
in a
do
pti
ng
mo
dif
ica
tio
ns
to o
ld c
lassif
icati
on
sy
stem
wh
ich
va
inc
on
sist
en
t w
ith
new
p
oli
cy
of
Mo
tor
Ca
rrie
r A
ct
of
19
80
. -
Re
ve
rsa
l o
f d
istr
ict
co
urt
aw
ard
o
f a
tto
rne
y'a
fe
es
and
c
os
ts t
o p
lain
tiff
s
af
ter
pa
rtie
s h
ad
en
tere
d
into
a c
ou
rt-a
pp
rov
ed
co
nse
nt
de
cre
e.
Co
rpo
rati
on
, o
ne
of
the
pa
rty
pla
inti
ffs
, la
ck
ed
sta
nd
ing
un
der
th
e C
lea
n W
ater
A
ct
to
com
pla
in o
f c
laim
ed
in
jury
, th
us,
n
ot
en
titl
ed
to
os
ts
.
Re
ve
rsa
l o
f I.
C.C
. o
rde
r a
uth
ori
zin
g s
hip
pe
rs t
o s
ee
k r
ed
rlc
tio
ns
and
re
fun
ds
of
ce
rta
in r
ail
fre
igh
t ra
tes
. P
eti
tio
n f
or
rev
iew
no
t s
tatu
tori
ly b
arr
ed
C
om
mis
sio
n
err
ed
in
co
nst
ruin
g
sta
tute
to
au
tho
riz
e d
ua
l r
ate
re
du
cti
on
s.
![Page 13: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
SIGN
ED OPI
NION
S AUTllORED BY
JUDGE DOR
K
CITATION
768 F.2d 1500 (1985)
OPIN
ION
Jers
ey Cen
tral
Pow
er &
Lig
ht
Comp
any v. F.E.R.C.
-
-
- De
tmar
va Pow
er &
Lig
ht Com
pany
u
x F.E.R.C.
Inc.
v.
F.E.R.C.
Alab
ama Po
wer Co
mpan
y v. F.C.C.
c
Mead
ows v. Pa
lmer
P
U.S. v. We
ster
n Electric Com
pan 0
F.T.C. v. Br
own
& Wil
liam
son
Corp
orat
ion
-1
I
Kin
g v.
Palm
er
Nati
onal
Cla
ssif
icat
ion Co
mnit
- x
tee v. U
.S.
-
I Ro
bbin
s v. Re
agan
a
LEAL ISSUES INVOLVED IN CASE
On pet
itio
n for re
hear
ing of 730 F.2d
816 (1m4j-,=r2,
order of conmission
modi
fyin
g utility's
rate schedule was remanded.
Commission order reducing
I ra
tes wi
thou
t a he
arin
g was
unreasonable.
I -
--
Deci
aion
of Co
mmis
sion
not to include annualized
in utility's test period base vacated and remanded.
In light of
the Commission
refusal to a
dopt
a per se rule against selected annualization, Commission was
to exp
lain
policy.
-
Comm
issi
on rul
e al
lowi
ng electric utilities to include in rate bases amounts
equal
to 50%
of inv
estm
ents in construction work in progress vacated and re-
1 manded.
Pur os
es for adopting rule were valid but reconsideration mandated by
, ef
fect
of ru!e.
Comm
issi
on det
ermi
nati
on that pole attachment rates charged cable
television
I op
erat
or by
powe
r company vacated and
remanded.
Commission errors made in
calc
ulat
ions
ren
dere
d the decision arbitrary and capricious.
----
- Pa
rt IV of opi
nion
wri
tten by Judge Bork.
AfFirms district court decision
that affirmed Ci
vil Se
rvice Commission decision that the Conmission had
no
Juri
sdic
tion
ove
r ap
peals by District of Columbia employee relative to detail
and
reas
sign
ment
. No
ju
risdiction as "detail" not -- an "employment
-
prece."
Dism
issa
l of app
eal of district court desicion setting forth four conditions
that reg
iona
l ho
ldin
g companies, created after reorganization of major tele-
comm
unic
atio
ns com
pany
, would have to meet
to g
et a waiver o
f "line o
f bus-
iness" re
stri
ctio
ns to pursue other ventures.
-
--
District cou
rt in
junc
tion relative to c
igarette advertising, &aught by
F.T.C.,
affirmed in
part
and remanded.
~anufacturer's advertisements were misleading
but
the in
junc
tion
was
broader than reasonably necessary
to prevent deception.
--
Judg
e Bo
rk not a mem
ber ofpanelreversing and remanding district court decision
rela
tive
to em
ploy
ment
discrimination complaint. He filed a statement concur-
ring
in den
ial of reh
earing en banc, joined by five judges, because the issue
the United St
ates
wan
ted
the rehearing on had not been beforeae
an el.
Affi
rmin
g de
cisi
on of Interstate Commerce Commission denying petitioner's
reou
est
to amend pro
visions of rate bureau agreement. petitioner's right
to
hear
ing no
t dented.
Denial of application was consistent with applicable law.
Commission's de
part
ure from past practice adeauatply explained.
Affi
rman
ce of di
stri
ct court decision granting government's motion for sumnary
judgment in su
it cha
llenging closing of shelter for homeless in federally
owne
d building.
Dicltrict cowt had jurisdiction over suit and decision was not
arbi
trar
y or
cap
rici
ous.
Government and agency were not
estopped from closing.
CRS -
9
![Page 14: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
Unl
OR
ED
B
Y J
UD
GE
BORK
78
5 F
.2d
1
04
3 (
19
86
);
ce
rt.
gra
nte
d,
55
U
.S.
L.W
. 3
42
4(U
.S.D
ec.1
5.
19
86
) (N
O.
86
-65
6)
786
F. 2
d 4
24
(1
98
6);
c
ert
. d
en.
55
U.S
.L.W
. 3
20
1
(19
86
)
78
6
F.2
d
11
86
(1
98
6)
78
9
F.2
d
26
(19
86
) ;
ce
rt.
de
n.
55 U
.S.L
.W.
32
78
(1
98
6)
STYLE
OF
CM
E - -__
Mo
rris
v.
Was
hin
gto
n M
etr
op
oli
- ta
n A
rea
Tra
nsi
t A
uth
ori
ty
Ab
ou
rezk
v.
Rea
gan
-
- -- - -
-
Neu
man
n v
. R
ein
forc
ed
E
art
h
Com
pany
Rm
eric
an
Mar
itim
e A
sso
cia
tio
n v
Com
mun
ity
Fo
r C
rea
tiv
e N
on-V
io-
len
ce
v.
Pie
rce
Be
au
fort
Co
un
ty
Bro
ad
ca
stin
g
Com
pany
v.
F.C
.C.
San
Lu
is O
bis
po
Mo
ther
s F
or
Pea
ce v
. U
.S.
Nu
cle
ar
Re
gu
lato
r C
om
iss
ion
Mee
rop
ol
v.
Mee
se
Ro
ther
y
Sto
rag
e C
Van
C
o.
v.
Atl
as
Van
L
ine
s
OPI
NIO
N
BA
LL
QN
L
LEG
AL
ISS
UE
S_I
EO
LV
ED
I
N C
ASE
- --
A
f fl
rma
nc
e o
f d
istr
ict
co
alr
t d
ism
issa
l,
on
gro
un
ds
of
sov
ere
ign
im
mu
nit
y,
of
su
it b
rou
gh
t a
ga
inst
t
he
~~
~b
y
a d
isc
ha
rge
d p
oli
ce
off
ice
r.
Co
ng
ress
an
d
sta
tes
of
Mar
yla
nd
an
d V
irg
inia
va
lid
ly c
on
ferr
ed
im
nu
nit
y
up
on
t
he
~~
~a
nd
D
.C.'
s p
art
icip
ati
on
d
id n
ot
de
fea
t su
ch E
lev
en
th A
men
dmen
t im
mu
nit
y.
- --
--
- -
De
nia
l o
f w
rit
of
ha
be
as
co
rpu
s,
inm
ed
iate
he
ari
ng
, an
d
sta
y o
f e
xtr
ad
itio
n
wa
rra
nt.
P
eti
tio
ne
r fa
ile
d t
o e
sta
bli
sh
th
at
inte
rna
tio
na
l c
on
ve
nti
on
co
nc
ern
- in
g g
en
oc
ide
was
in
eff
ec
t in
Un
ited
S
tate
s;
bu
t,
if
so
It
wo
uld
n
ot
hav
e p
er-
ta
ine
d
in t
his
ca
se.
Pe
titi
on
er
fail
ed
to
sh
oy
-lik
%o
od
o
f su
cc
ess
on
me
rits
. D
istr
ict
co
urt
gra
nt
of
sum
mar
y ju
dg
men
t in
su
it c
ha
lle
ng
ing
re
fus
al
to i
ss
ue
v
isa
s
to a
lie
ns
to
com
e to
sp
ea
k o
n
iss
ue
s o
f p
ub
lic
co
nc
ern
va
ca
ted
an
d
re-
man
ded
. M
ay
ex
clu
sio
n b
e b
ase
d
up
on
mer
e p
rese
nc
e o
r i
s h
igh
er
sta
nd
ard
of
inte
nt
to e
nfza
ge
in a
cti
vit
ies
i
nt
-~
~~
e~
t
re
nW
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt
jud
gm
ent
n.0
.v.
in f
av
or
of
pla
inti
ff
's
co
mp
eti
tor
in a
nti
tru
st
ac
tio
n.
De
sig
ne
r o
f re
tain
ing
wa
lls
use
d
in c
on
itru
cti
on
of
hig
h-
way
s an
d
bri
dg
es
no
t e
nti
tle
d t
o r
ec
ov
er
du
e to
fa
ilu
re t
o d
efi
ne
pro
pe
r r
el-
e
va
nt
ma
rke
t.
Rem
and
of
dis
tric
t c
eu
rt s
um
nar
y
jud
gm
ent
ag
ain
st p
lain
tiff
in
ch
all
en
ge
to
m
ari
tim
e s
ub
sid
y b
oa
rd'a
d
ec
iaio
n
to a
men
d o
pe
rati
ng
-dif
fere
nti
al
sub
sid
y
co
ntr
ac
ts w
ith
su
bsi
diz
ed
ca
rrie
re.
Bo
ard
's
de
cis
ion
did
no
t a
de
ou
ate
ly
as
se
ss
im
pa
ct
on
un
sub
sid
ize
d
shlp
pe
rs n
ec
es
sit
ati
ng
rem
and
. -- - -
De
nia
l o
f m
oti
on
to
dis
au
ali
fy U
.S.
Att
orn
ey
'a
off
icea
s c
ot~
ns
el f
or
Se
cre
tary
o
f. H
ou
sin
g
and
U
rban
D
evel
op
men
t o
n g
rou
nd
s o
f c
on
flic
t o
f in
tere
st
sin
ce
sam
e o
ff
ice
wo
uld
h
ave
to i
nv
es
tig
ate
all
eg
ati
on
s o
f p
erj
ury
on
p
art
of
HUD
o
ffic
ial
Wou
ld
be
in
tru
sio
n o
f c
ou
rt i
nto
pro
sec
uto
ria
l d
isc
reti
on
. m
rm
an
ce
of
Co
mm
issi
on
d
ec
is
io
nw
ng
-ant
p
erm
issi
on
h,
co
nst
ruc
t Ft
d s
tati
on
in
co
mm
un
ity
o
f 8
,60
0 w
hil
e a
pp
rov
ing
an
oth
er
ap
pli
ca
nt'
s
lic
en
se
to
c
on
etr
uc
t FM
a
tati
on
in
ne
igh
bo
rin
g c
on
mu
nit
y
of
3,0
00
. S
eco
nd
ap
pli
ca
nt
pro
pe
rly
giv
en
pre
fere
nc
e u
nd
er
Co
nrm
un
icat
ion
s A
ct o
f 1
93
4.
-
/~
n
bane
aff
irm
an
ce
o
f C
om
mm
0% is
sua
nc
e o
me
ns
es
to
r n
uc
lea
r po
wer
p
lan
t.
h&
lati
on
s d
id n
ot
rea
uir
e C
om
mis
sio
n
to c
on
sid
er
po
ten
tia
l c
om
pli
ca
tin
g e
ffe
a
of
ea
rth
au
ak
ea
o
n e
mer
gen
cy
resp
on
ae
a
and
su
ch
fa
ilu
re w
as
no
t c
ap
ric
iou
s o
r la
rbit
rary
. P
eti
tio
ne
rs n
ot
en
titl
ed
to
su
pp
lem
ent
rec
ord
. D
istr
ict
co
urt
sum
mar
y ju
dg
men
t to
r g
ov
ern
men
t In
Fre
ed
om
(1fl
nto
rma
tio
n
Act
lc
aa
e a
ffir
me
d i
n p
art
an
d
rem
and
ed
in p
art
. C
oo
pe
rati
on
o
f F
.B.I
. w
as
ind
icab
et
Iby
a
cti
on
s a
s i
t i
s u
nre
aso
na
ble
to
ex
pe
ct
even
th
e m
oat
e
xh
au
stiv
e s
ea
rch
to
u
nco
ver
e
ve
ry d
ocu
men
t.
Att
irm
an
ce
ot
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n.
Van
ll
ne
rs
de
cis
ion
to
te
rmin
ate
th
e
co
ntr
ac
t o
f an
y
ag
en
t w
ith
in
ters
tate
au
tho
rity
wh
ich
re
fuse
d
to t
ran
sfe
r th
e
au
tho
rity
to
se
pa
rate
co
rpo
rati
on
did
no
t v
iola
te S
her
man
An
ti-T
rust
Ac
t.
![Page 15: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
Ulll
OR
ED
BY
Jl
JDG
E
DORK
79
2 F
.2d
23
2 (1
98
6);
c
ert
. d
en.
55
U.S
.L.W
. 3
39
2
(19
86
)
ce
rt.
gr.
su
b n
om Bo
os
v.
Darr
y,
55
U.S
.L.W
. 3
56
9
U.S
. F
eb.
23
1
9
i
14" '" T
hre
e W
ay
Co
rpo
rati
on
v.
I.C
.C.
c
Ma
v
. S
ec
reta
ry o
f th
e N
av
f
Bu
sin
ess
an
d
Pro
fess
ion
alP
eo
ple
x
Fo
r th
e P
ub
lic
In
tere
st
v.
N.R
.C.
I C
art
er
v.
Dis
tric
t o
f C
olu
mb
ia
c
Inte
rna
tio
na
l B
roth
erh
oo
d
of
Ele
ctr
ica
l W
ork
ers
Lo
ca
l 1
46
6,
AFL
-CIO
V
. N
.L.R
.B.
Pit
tsb
urg
h a
nd
Lak
e E
rie
Ra
il-
x R
oad
Com
pany
v.
I .C
.C
.
Fin
ze
r v
. B
arry
x
LEG
A
IS U
ES
INV
OLV
D
IN
CA
SE
ck
o+
ap
p
- v
an
lin
e t
o a
men
d p
oo
iin
g
agre
emen
t w
ith
ag
en
ts.
He
ari
ng
no
t r
ew
ire
d w
her
e rl
att
er
was
n
ot
of
maj
or
tra
nsp
ort
ati
on
im
po
rta
nc
e w
ith
l
it
tl
e l
ike
l~b
oo
d th
at
co
mp
eti
tio
n w
ou
ld b
e r
es
tra
ine
d.
.-
Dis
sen
t fr
om
de
nia
l o
f su
gse
ati
on
of
reh
ea
rin
g
en
ban
c.
Jud
ge
Bo
rk
no
t o
n p
ane
he
ari
ng
ca
se,
782
F.2
d
22
7
(~
.c.C
ir.
19
86
) w
hic
h w
as
va
ca
ted
an
d
rem
and
ed
55
U.S
.L.W
. 4
71
6
(19
87
) [F
ed
era
l C
irc
uit
Co
urt
had
ju
ris
dic
tio
n
ov
er
ea
sel.
D
ec
isio
n i
nv
olv
ed
co
mp
ensa
tio
n
for
Jap
an
ese
-&~
yri
ca
ns
inte
rne
d d
~~
ri
uX
lU
L-
R
ev
ers
al
and
re
man
d
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n r
ela
tiv
e t
o m
ari
ne
co
rpo
ral'
s
ch
all
en
ge
of
his
ge
ne
ral
co
urt
ma
rtia
l c
on
vic
tio
n
Lor
mu
rde
rin
g h
is w
ife
. A
cti
on
sh
ou
ld
be
tre
ate
d
as
a p
eti
tio
n
for
ha
be
as
co
rpu
s;
thu
s,
inas
mu
ch a
s
Mon
k w
as
inc
arc
era
ted
in
Kan
sas,
U
.S.
Dis
tric
t C
ou
rt
in D
.C.
had
n
o
juri
sd
icti
C
orp
ora
tio
n n
ot
en
titl
ed
to
fe
es
an
d e
xp
en
ses
in c
on
ne
cti
on
wit
h
inte
rve
nti
on
in
pro
ce
ed
ing
fu
nd
ed,
in p
art
, b
y
En
erg
y
and
Wat
er D
evel
op
men
t A
pp
rop
ria
tio
ns
Ac
t.
Co
rmis
sio
n d
en
ial
of
fee
s u
nd
er
Eq
ua
l A
cces
s to
Ju
sti
ce
Act
tj
ph
eld
.
- -.--
Dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n i
n s
uit
all
eg
ing
co
ns
titu
tio
na
l an
d
com
mon
l&
to
rts
a
ga
inst
va
rio
!~s
po
lic
e o
ffic
ers
an
d
the
cit
y a
ffir
me
d
in p
art
an
d v
ac
ate
d
and
re
man
ded
in
pa
rt.
Arr
est
ee
s fa
ile
d t
o e
sta
bli
sh
a p
ers
iste
nt
and
~
er
va
siv
e
pa
tte
rn
of
co
nd
uc
t c
au
sin
g r
igh
t d
ep
riv
ati
on
. E
rro
r in
ev
ide
nc
e p
rese
nL
ati
on
. A
ffir
min
g d
ec
isio
n.o
f B
oar
d
dis
mis
sin
g U
nio
n c
laim
th
at
emp
loy
er
had
co
nn
nit
ted
-
un
fair
la
bo
r p
rac
tic
e b
y
eli
mk
na
tin
g C
hri
stm
as
bo
nu
s.
By
ag
ree
ing
to
in
teg
ra-
tio
n c
lau
se o
f c
oll
ec
tiv
e b
arg
ain
ing
ag
reem
ent,
u
nio
n
los
t fu
rth
er
rig
ht
to
ba
rga
in o
ve
r b
on
us.
-- -
Den
yin
g
in p
art
an
d
dis
mis
sin
g i
n p
rt
a c
he
lle
ng
e
to C
om
mis
sio
n
eli
min
ati
on
o
ca
se b
y c
ase
re
vie
w o
f fi
na
nc
ial
au
ali
fic
ati
on
a
in c
ert
ain
lic
en
se
pro
ce
ed
ing
s A
tom
ic
En
erg
y A
ct
did
no
t re
au
ire
oth
erw
ise
an
d
rule
was
n
ot
arb
itra
ry o
r c
ap
ric
iou
s.
Dis
mis
sal
of
rev
iew
of
F.A
.A.
&e
cis
ion
s a
uth
ori
zin
g p
ilo
t to
fly
com
mer
cia-
a
irc
ra
ft
af
ter
tem
po
rary
su
spe
nsi
on
fo
r fl
yin
g w
hil
e i
nto
xic
ate
d.
Air
lin
e
lac
ke
d
sta
nd
ing
to
ch
all
en
ge
ac
tio
n t
ak
en
re
lati
ve
to
fo
rmer
em
plo
yee
.
Pe
titi
on
fo
r re
vie
w o
f ~
&is
sio
n d
isrn
fssr
ll
ot
cm
nt
nt
ch
ai
en
gi
ng
a c
arr
ier
ca
nc
ell
ati
on
of
join
t ra
tes
. I.
C.C
. e
xe
rcis
ed
re
aso
na
ble
dis
cre
tio
n
un
der
th
e
ap
pli
ca
ble
sta
tute
s.
Dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n r
ela
tiv
e t
o c
ha
lle
ng
e€
-s
tatu
tes
ba
rrin
g c
ert
ain
a
cti
on
s w
ith
in 5
00
fee
t OF
fo
reig
n e
mb
ass
ies
aff
irm
ed
in
pa
rt
and
re
man
ded
. S
tatu
te w
as
pe
rmis
sib
le
acco
mo
dat
ion
bet
wee
n
na
tio
na
l in
tere
sts
an
d
Fir
st
Am
en
dm
ent.
N
o le
ss
re
str
icti
ve
alt
ern
ati
ve
. N
ot
un
co
nst
itu
tio
na
lly
v
ag
ue
or
w~
fr
-
- --
- -
- -p
![Page 16: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
UTl
lOR
ED
BY
JU
DG
E
DORK
sn
tm- A
SE
I E.T
.C:
v.
PPG
I
nk
str
les
, In
c.
- -
00
F.2
d
11
65
(1
98
6)
Na
tio
na
l T
rea
sury
Em
plo
yee
s U
nion
v
. F
ed
era
l L
abo
r R
ela
tio
ns
Au
tho
rit i
I I
00
F.2
d
11
87
(1
98
6)
1 ~e
d
Lak
e B
and
of
Ch
ipp
ewa
~n
dia
nsl
x
01
F.2
d
50
1
(19
86
);
Te
lec
om
un
ica
tLo
ns
Re
sea
rch
an
d
er
t.
de
n.
55
U.S
.L.W
. A
cti
on
Ce
nte
r v
. E
.C.C
. 8
21
(1
98
7)
OPI
NIO
N
, CO
NC
. D
LS .
LEG
AL
ISS
UE
S
INV
OLV
ED
IN C
ASE
I D
istr
ict
co
urt
d
ec
isio
n o
n F
.T.C
. a
cti
on
co
nte
stin
g m
erg
er
as
vio
lati
on
ot
(
I 0
1F
.2d
39
0(1
98
6)
Res
tau
ran
tCo
rpo
rati
on
ofA
mer
- x
ica
v.
N.L
.R.B
. -
v.
F.E
.R.C
.
I I
,03
F.2
d
12
13
(1
98
6)
1 ree
en
berg
v
. F
ood
and
Drl
Jg A
dmin
-1
I
104
F.2
d
71
0
(19
86
) N
atu
ral
Re
sou
rce
s D
efe
nse
Co
un
ca
x
v
. U
.S.
En
vir
on
men
tal
~r
ote
cti
on
l
Cla
yto
n A
ct
nff
irm
ed
in
pa
rt,
rev
ers
ed
in
pa
rt a
nd
rem
and
ed.
Ev
ide
nc
e s
up
po
rt-
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt c
on
clu
sio
n t
ha
t a
cn
uis
itio
n m
ay
be
fo
rbid
de
n u
nd
er
Cla
yto
n A
ct
bu
t p
reli
min
ary
in
j~m
cti
on
sho
uld
ha
ve
bee
n
en
tere
d
rath
er
tha
n h
old
ord
er.
--
- --
- -
Re
ve
rsa
l o
f o
rde
r o
f A
uth
ori
ty
ho
ldin
g t
ha
t u
nio
n
co
mn
itte
d
an
un
fair
la
bo
r p
rac
tic
e b
y r
ef
~~
si
ng
to
pro
vid
e
att
orn
ey
s to
re
pre
sen
t n
on
un
ion
em
plo
yee
s in
a
sta
tuto
ry a
pp
ea
l.
Un
ion
s d
uty
is
sam
e a
s t
ha
t in
th
e p
riv
ate
s
ec
tor
so n
o u
nfa
ir
lab
or
pra
cti
ce
wh
ere
rep
rese
nta
tio
n
lim
ce
d t
o c
oll
ec
tiv
e b
arn
ain
inn
. 1
)is
tric
t c
ou
rt s
um
nar
y
jud
pn
en
t fo
r U
.S.
in F
ed
era
l T
ort
Cla
ims
Act
s
.~
it
for
pro
oe
rty
dam
age
on
re
serv
ati
on
a
ffir
me
d
in p
art
, v
ac
ate
d
in p
art
an
d
rem
and
ed.
Ce
rta
in F
BI
ac
tio
ns
in
ho
sta
ge
sit
ua
tio
n w
ere
pro
tec
ted
Fr
om
lia
bil
ity
un
der
FT
CA
an
d
ce
rta
in a
cti
on
s w
ere
no
t.
Fa
ct
iss
ue
s t
o b
e d
ec
ide
d b
elo
w.
Co
mm
issi
on
o
rde
r re
fusi
ng
to
ap
ply
th
ree
fo
rms
of
po
liti
ca
l b
roa
dc
ast
re
gu
lali
ol-
It
o
tele
tex
t,
a n
ew
tec
hn
olo
gy
aff
irm
ed
in
pa
rt,
rev
ers
ed
in
pa
rt a
nd
re
man
ded
. C
om
mis
sio
n d
ec
isio
n w
as
rea
son
ab
le b
ut
err
ors
mad
e in
in
terp
reti
ng
ce
rta
in p
ro-
vis
ion
s o
f C
om
m~
~n
icst
ion
s Ac
t.
Ra
tio
na
l d
ec
isio
n
in n
ot
ap
ply
ing
Fa
irn
ess
Do
ct.
'Rev
iew
of
Bo
ard
d
ec
isio
n t
ha
t em
plo
yer
v
iola
ted
Na
tio
na
l ~
sb
or
R
ela
tio
ns
Act
by
Id
isc
ha
rgin
g
emp
loy
ees
for
un
ion
s
oli
cit
ati
on
. P
eti
tio
n
for
enfo
rcem
ent
of
ord
ed
de
nie
d
in p
art
an
d r
ante
d
in p
art
an
d
ca
se r
eman
ded
. E
mp
loy
er
fail
ure
to
tre
a
sam
e a
s u
nio
n e
oli
cit
ati
on
a i
s _
nb
t d
ls
c~
im
in
gt
~o
~
11
ap
pli
ca
tio
n,
on
ju
ris
dic
tio
na
l g
rou
nd
s,
for
au
th-
ori
za
tio
n
to a
ban
do
n
ce
rta
in p
urc
ha
ses
of
na
tura
l g
as
rev
ers
ed
an
d
ca
se r
eman
de
Na
tura
l G
as A
ct
giv
es
Co
mm
issi
on
ju
ris
dic
tio
n
ov
er
suc
h a
cti
on
.
-- -
Aff
irm
an
ce
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
ns
die
mis
sin
e s
uit
on
ba
sis-
of
re
s j
ud
ica
ta
de
ny
ing
mo
tio
n
to c
lari
fy c
om
pla
int
by
am
end
men
t,
and
im
po
sin
g s
an
cti
on
s fo
r li
tig
ati
ng
in
bad
fa
ith
. P
rec
lusi
on
do
ctr
ine
ba
rre
d a
tto
rne
y's
s
uit
fo
r v
io-
lati
on
of
rig
ht
of
pri
va
cy
an
d
"dis
co
ve
ry
fra
ud
" c
on
spir
ac
y.
Sa
nc
tio
ns
jus
tif
. x
R
ev
ers
al
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt s
rm
ar
y j
ud
gm
ent
for
FDA
an
d C
AT
sca
nn
er
ma
nu
fac
ture
in
su
it b
y
pu
bli
c c
itiz
en
gro
up
s
taf
f a
tto
rne
y
to c
om
pel
d
isc
los
ure
of
fa
cil
it-
ie
s o
wn
ing
CA
T sc
an
ne
rs o
f c
ert
ain
ma
nu
fac
ture
r.
Ma
teri
al
iss
ue
s o
f fa
ct
pre
- c
lud
ed
su
mm
ary
jud
gm
ent
un
der
ex
emp
tio
n
to F
reed
om
o
f In
form
ati
on
--
Ac
t.
I A
ffir
ma
nc
e o
f EP
A
de
cis
ion
wit
hd
raw
ing
pro
po
sed
r
-i
on
s go
ve
rnin
g v
iny
l c
hlo
rid
e e
mls
aio
ns.
EP
A
ac
ted
re
aso
na
bly
u
nd
er
Cle
an
Air
Act
p
rov
isio
ns
go
ve
r-
nin
g h
az
ard
ou
s p
oll
uta
nts
in
re
lvin
n o
n e
con
om
ic
and
te
ch
no
lon
ica
l fa
cto
rs
in
, -
Iwit
hd
raw
ing
re
gu
lati
on
s.
En
Ban
s d
ec
isio
n,
No.
8
5-1
15
0
(D
.c.c
~~
. Ju
ly 2
8.1
98
7)
De
nia
l o
f su
gg
est
ion
of
reh
ea
rin
g e
n S
nc
. JU
- B
ork
o
n
ma
jori
ty b
elo
w.
!802
F
.2d
4
98
(D
.C.C
ir.
19
86
1 f
O~
inio
n bv
S
ca
lia
l.
Su
it c
on
clu
ded
b
efo
re e
ffe
c-
z.
.
tiv
e d
ate
of
E-u
al
Acc
ess
to J
us
tic
e
Act
th
us
ba
rrin
g
awar
d
of
att
orn
ey
fe
es
un
der
A
ct.
- -
- -- - . --
_I
![Page 17: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
UTN
ORE
D
RY J
UD
GE
DORK
map--
OF
, MAJ ,?,
DIS
,:
10
71
(1
98
6)
Ce
nte
r f
5u
to
SZ
Y v.
Tho
mas
1
80
6 F
.2d
10
93
(1
98
6)
Te
~e
co
rmu
nic
ati
on
s Res
earc
h &
A
cti
on
Ce
nte
r o
n B
ehal
f o
f R
. C
hec
kn
off
V
. A
lln
et
Com
mun
icat
- I
ixl
ion
Se
rvic
es.
Jn
c.
, 80
6 F
.2d
1
11
5 (
19
86
) T
elec
om
mu
nic
atio
ns
Res
earc
h
and
I A
ctio
n C
en
ter
v.
F.C
.C.
80
7 F
.2d
1
05
2
(19
86
);
Se
cu
riti
es
In
du
stry
Ass
oc
iati
on
x
c
ert
. d
en.
55 U
.S.L
.W.
v.
Bo
ard
o
f G
ov
ern
ors
of
the
3
85
3
(19
87
) F
ed
era
l R
eser
ve
Sy
stem
(f
ou
r
Ind
ust
rie
s v.
.S.
feb
. 2
0.
19
87
)(N
os.
I 80
9 F
.2d
79
4 (1
98
7)
Ha
itia
n R
efu
gee
Ce
nte
r v
.
I Gra
cey
1
1 8
09
F.2
d
84
7
(19
87
);
Ind
epen
den
t U
.S.
Tan
ker
Ow
ners
x
pe
t.
for
ce
rt.
file
d
Co
mm
itte
ev
.-
55
U.S
.L.W
. 37
94
(U.S
. 1
5.
19
87
) (N
o.86
-18;
9
) 8
09
F.2
d
909
(198
7)
Am
alga
mat
ed
Tra
nsi
t U
nio
n,
AFL
- x
81
0 F
.2d
1
16
8 (
19
87
) Je
rse
y C
en
tra
l P
ower
&
Lig
ht
x C
ompa
ny v
. F
.E.R
.C.
LE
liA
kd
SS
U_
EE
mO
LU
.SAS
E h
is
op
inio
n a
nd
ju
dg
men
t v
ac
ate
d F
ebru
ary
6,
19
87
,wh
en s
ug
ge
stio
n f
or
reh
ea
r-
ing
en
ban
c g
ran
ted
. C
hal
len
ge
to r
ule
of
EPA
d
esi
gn
ed
to
co
mp
ensa
te a
uto
mo
bil
n
an
ufa
ctu
rers
re
tro
ac
tiv
ely
fo
r te
sti
ng
pro
ced
ure
ch
ang
es w
hic
h n
eg
ati
ve
ly
ef-
fe
cte
d f
ue
l ec
onom
y c
om
pa
rab
ilit
y f
or
mo
del
y
ea
r 1
97
5.
Aff
irm
ance
o
f d
istr
ict
co
rrt
dis
mis
sal.
fo
r la
ck
of
sta
nd
ing
, str
it
by
n
on
pro
fi
ass
oc
iati
on
on
be
ha
lf
of
mem
bers
to
re
co
ve
r da
mag
es
all
eg
ing
ill
eg
al
du
al
rate
st
ruc
ture
.
Den
ial
of
sug
ge
stio
n t
ha
t p
an
el
de
cis
ion
, 8
01
F.2
d
501
(D.C
.Cir
1
98
6)
be
re
- h
ea
rd e
n b
anc.
T
ha
t d
ec
isio
n,
=,w
ritt
en
b
y J
ud
ge
Bo
rk.
-
Aff
irm
ance
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ism
issa
l o
f li
be
l a
cti
on
ag
ain
st n
ewsp
aper
pu
b-
lis
he
r u
nd
er
the
Dis
tric
t o
f C
olu
mb
ia
lon
g a
rm
sta
tute
. M
ail
ing
of
pa
pe
r,
co
nta
inin
g a
lle
ge
dly
lib
elo
us
art
icle
, in
to t
he
Dis
tric
t o
f C
olu
mb
ia
was
n
ot
&le
nt
ba
sis
fo
r d
istr
ict
co
-rrt
iu
rlsd
icti
on
. R
ev
ers
al
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ec
isio
n i
nv
ali
da
tin
g B
oar
d's
o
rde
r p
erm
itti
ng
sta
t c
ha
rte
red
co
mm
~rc
ial b
ank
to
pla
ce
co
mn
erc
ial
pap
er
issu
ed
by
thir
d p
art
y.
Gla
ss-S
tea
ga
ll
Act
d
id n
ot
pre
clu
de
ban
k E
rom
ac
tin
g a
s a
dv
iso
r an
d
ag
en
t to
co
mm
erci
al
pap
er
issu
ers
. --
. -- - -
By
ord
er
of
Jun
e 2
4,
19
87
, a
n o
rde
r to
re
he
ar
en
ban
c w
as v
ac
ate
d a
nd
Ju
dg
e B
ork
's
dis
sen
t w
as
ado
pte
d a
s m
ajo
rity
op
inio
n.
Co
mm
issi
on
re
all
oc
ati
on
of
co
sts
fo
r n
uc
lea
r po
wer
p
lan
e a
mon
g a
ffil
iate
d o
pe
rati
ng
co
mp
anie
s re
ve
rse
d
and
rem
and
ed.
Com
mis
sion
d
ec
l -
al.!zuWL---
Aff
irm
ance
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt d
ism
issa
l o
f a
cti
on
bro
ug
ht
to c
kll
en
ge
pro
grm
o
f in
terd
icti
ng
un
do
cum
ente
d
ali
en
s o
n t
he
hig
h s
ea
s.
Co
rpo
rati
on
an
d m
embe
rs
lack
ed p
rud
en
tia
l st
and
in^
as
th
ey
wer
e n
ot
wit
hin
zo
ne
of
inte
res
t in
ten
de
d t
b
e p
rotk
cte
d.
If
no
Fir
s;
Am
end
ien
t c
laim
, n
o i
nju
ry,
so n
o A
rtic
le 1
11
s- T
ran
spo
rta
tio
n b
ep
art
me
nt
rule
, a
ust
ain
ed
in
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt,
allo
wir
lg
sub
sid
- iz
ed
ve
ss
els
to
en
ter
do
mes
tic
ship
pin
g m
ark
et
upon
re
pay
men
t o
f su
bsi
dy
vac
at
ed.
Ru
le a
uth
ori
ze
d u
nd
er M
erch
ant
Ha
rin
e A
ct b
ut
sta
tem
en
t o
f b
as
is a
nd
pu
r-
po
se i
na
de
au
ate
acc
ou
nt
of
how
Ac
t's
pu
rpo
se
serv
ed
by
ru
le. -
Re
ve
rsa
l an
d
rem
and
of
dis
tric
t c
ou
rt s
umm
ary
jud
gm
ent
for
Lah
or
Se
cre
tary
whc
c
ert
ifie
d
ce
rta
in l
ab
or
pro
tec
tiv
e a
rran
gem
ents
as
"fa
ir
and
eo
uit
ab
le."
C
ase
no
t m
oo
t.
Se
cre
tary
co
uld
no
t c
ert
ify
, u
nd
er U
rban
Mas
s T
ran
sit
Act
o
f 1
96
4,
such
arr
ang
emen
ts b
efo
re d
isp
ute
mec
han
ism
pro
vis
ion
in
pla
ce
. C
omm
issi
on
ord
er
mo
dif
yin
g u
tili
ty r
ate
BC
he
du
le t
o e
xc
lud
e i
nv
es t
men
t in
c
an
ce
lle
d n
uc
lea
r po
wer
p
lan
t v
ac
ate
d a
nd
rem
and
ed.
Uti
lity
en
titl
ed
to
e
vid
en
lia
ry h
ea
rin
g o
n w
het
her
ra
tes
"ju
st
and
re
aso
na
ble
."
Reh
eari
ng
en
ban
c o
f is
sue
s ra
ise
d i
n 7
30
. - F.2
d
81
6
(19
84
) - .
- a
nd
7
68
F.2
d 1
50
0 (
19
85
) 5
%~
.
![Page 18: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
SIGN
ED OPI
NION
S AUTIIORED
RY
JUD
GE BOR
K
CXMION
OF W
E
--
No.
86-3041 (July
7,
1987)
I Vo.
86-1239 (July 10,
'
1987)
No. 86-5351 (July 17,
1987)
v. Butler
International Un
ion,
United Mi
ne
Work
ers of
Ame
rica
v.
Mine
Sa
fet
and He
alth
Adm
inis
trat
ion
(two
cases)
Zoel
sch v. Ar
thur
And
erso
n &
Co.
No.
86-5510 (July 17,
1987)
Carl
in v.
McKe
an
u No.
86-1256
(July
21,
1987)
,Branch v. F.C.C.
KO.
85-1150 (July 28,
1987)
Natu
ral Re
sour
ces De
fense Co
unci
-
Inc. v. U.S. En
viro
nmen
tal
Prot
ecti
on Age
ncy
5-5233 (July 31,
Bart
lett
on beh
alf of Neu
man v.
Bowe
n -
I No. 86-5210( July 31,
1987)
Nati
onal
Mar
itim
e Un
ion of Ame
r-
ica,
AFL
-CIO
v.
Comm
ande
r, Mil
- itary Se
alif
t Co
mnan
d
o. 83-1694 (August 7,
987)
LEGA ISSUES INVO V
D IN CASE
Affi
rman
ce of dis
tric
t court:ury
verdictLiz case involving i&;;iracy-to
vio-
late the Truth in Len
ding Act and violations of the Travel Act
in a scheme to
defr
aud involving mo
rtga
ge loans that caused many victims to lose homes.
No
reve
rsib
le error in cou
rt below.
--
Administration's gr
anti
ng of indefinite interim relief
from operation of man-
dato
ry safety st
anda
rds pending decisions on petitions for modifications of
the st
anda
rds va
cate
d. Such relief was
contrary to clear congressional intent.
Catr
ett v. Jo
hns-
Manv
ille
Sal
es
Corp
orat
ion
Lo
. 85-5984 (August 7,
1987)
for want o
f subject matter
jurisdiction.
F'ralulent misrepresentations in securities transaction were not
ade wi
thin
the United St
ates; thus, courts have no Jurisdiction over suit
for injunctive relief
including re
inst
atem
ent as Postmaster General. Congress vested Board of Gover-
nors
of the Po
stal
Ser
vice with power of removal of Postmaster General without
Save
Our
Cum
berl
and Mo
unta
ins,
v. H
odel
judicial review.
-----
Deni
al of pet
itio
n for review of Commission decision that station which
employs
tele
visi
on rep
orte
r wo
uld be required to give "equal time"
to opponents if
he ran
for public of
fice
, Time would be equal to his regular daily appearancec
Deci
sion
con
stit
utio
nal and proper interpretation of statute.
-- - -
En banc
revi
ew of an or
der of EpA with
remand to EPA for reconsideration. In
--
sett
ing em
issi
on sta
ndards for hazardous pollutants, cost and
technological
feas
ibil
ity ca
nnot
be co
nsidered in determining what ig safe.
Determination
must
be based
sole
ly upon risk to health.
x Re
cons
ider
atio
n of pre
vious granting of suggestion of r
eheari~ en hanc
and
vaca
ting
order.
Issu
es involved in decision not unique or
important enough to
(justify en banc
consideration.
Affi
rman
ce of dis
tric
t court dismissal of suit for lack of standing under
the
Serv
ice Co
ntra
ct I\ct.Union challenged cornand's contract to have private firms
oper
ate
twelve gov
ernm
ent owned oceanographic ships.
Union, representing
civi
l se
rvic
e ma
rine
rs who would be replaced, lacked causally traceable injury
aee aga
in bef
ore
the sa
me panel after reversal and
remand for recqnsideratiin
f ea
rlie
r de
ciai
on, 75
6 F.2d 181
(1985),
supra. Defendant was not entitled tc
umoarv ludmnent as a ma
tter of law in district court as the record contains
I I
Isufficient ev
iden
ce to create a genuine issue of material
fact.
...
- x
I kffirmance in pa
rt and reversal in part of district court award of attorney's
fees and ex
pens
es und
er the surface-~ining Control and Reclamation Act
of 1977.
liat
rict
cou
rt largely succeeded in responsibly exercising discretion in settin
attorney's fees but
co
mmitted legal error
in arriving at c
ertain hoc~rly rates.
![Page 20: 87-695 A: Synoposes [sic] of Reported Decisions of the](https://reader030.pdfslide.net/reader030/viewer/2022012723/61b4fe8ada74ae4af6172821/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
SIG
NE
D O
PIN
ION
S A
Un
lOR
ED
BY
JUD
GE
BO
RK
..
ance Board decision
Iietrict court exceeded its scope o
f r
eview b
y interpreting travel r
egulations
de
- n
ova
to find hat foreign aervice officer, d
uring c
hange o
f s
tation, v
iolate
travel regs. by utilizing luxury riverboat
-.
as family transportation.
- -
American Law Division
I A
ug
us
t 1
3,
1987
