Judges Commons^™

To Defer Or Not To Defer: Judicial Review Of Zoning Board Decisions In New York, Elliot Gardner

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The note examines the judicial review of zoning board decisions in New York, emphasizing the need to balance deference to local boards with ensuring fairness and transparency. It argues that excessive judicial deference can lead to arbitrary and unjust decisions, particularly in distinguishing between variances and special permits. The author advocates for clearer judicial standards, such as a higher scrutiny for special permits, and proposes reforms like specialized courts to enhance consistency and fairness in zoning decisions.

Mixed Signals: Reconsidering The Political Economy Of Judicial Deference To Administrative Agencies, Matthew C. Stephenson

ExpressO

This paper investigates rational choice explanations for patterns of Supreme Court decision-making with respect to the appropriate level of judicial deference to administrative agency decisions. In particular, I assess empirically the thesis that the Supreme Court expands deference when the Supreme Court is ideologically closer to the executive than to the circuit courts, and contracts deference when the opposite is true. I find little to no evidence supporting this "rational choice" theory of judicial deference. Given this surprising null finding, I offer alternative explanations for the data and suggest directions for future research.

Marbury V. Madison As The First Great Administrative Law Decision, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 481 (2004), Thomas W. Merrill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Consular Absolutism: The Need For Judicial Review In The Adjudication Of Immigrant Visas For Permanent Residence, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 577 (2004), Maria Zas

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Independence In Virginia, W. Hamilton Bryson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Second Annual Henry Lecture: Judicial Discretion In Statutory Interpretation, Frank H. Easterbrook

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reply To Judge Easterbrook: The Unsupported Delegation Of Conflict Adjudication In Erisa Benefit Claims Under The Guise Of Judicial Deference, Donald T. Bogan

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reply To Judge Easterbrook: Judicial Discretion And Statutory Interpretation, Steven J. Cleveland

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legislative Supremacy: Myth Or Reality?, James Oakes

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Valuation Averaging: A New Procedure For Resolving Valuation Disputes, Keith Sharfman

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

In this Article, Professor Sharfman addresses the problem of "discretionary valuation": that courts resolve valuation disputes arbitrarily and unpredictably, thus harming litigants and society. As a solution, he proposes the enactment of "valuation averaging," a new procedure for resolving valuation disputes modeled on the algorithmic valuation processes often agreed to by sophisticated private firms in advance of any dispute. He argues that by replacing the discretion of judges and juries with a mechanical valuation process, valuation averaging would cause litigants to introduce more plausible and conciliatory valuations into evidence and thereby reduce the cost of valuation litigation and increase the …

Developing A Full And Fair Evidentiary Record In A Nonadversary Setting: Two Proposals For Improving Social Security Disability Adjudications, Jeffrey Lubbers, Frank S. Bloch, Paul R. Verkuil

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Alternative Approaches To Judicial Review Of Social Security Disability Cases, Jeffrey Lubbers

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

For many years, Congress has had various bills before it to create alternatives to the current practice of Article III review (in district courts) of Social Security disability cases. This report, prepared initially for the Social Security Advisory Board, reviews the various legislative proposals and statutory alternatives such as the Veterans Administration administrative/judicial review structure. It concludes that, on balance, review before an Article I court (with Court of Appeals review limited to purely legal issues) has numerous advantages over the present system. These advantages include improvements in the accuracy and consistency of results (the federal district courts have vastly …

Voting And Electoral Politics In The Wisconsin Supreme Court, Jason J. Czarnezki

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article examines criminal cases decided by the Wisconsin Supreme Court over a fifteen-year period in an effort to discern whether judicial elections undercut judicial independence by affecting the ways justices vote. Wisconsin was chosen for this study because the state's mix of appointed and elected judges allows a researcher to control for different judicial selection systems. Specifically, this Article questions whether voting patterns may be affected by a justice's proximity to judicial elections, election margins, and whether a justice was appointed or elected in the initial term, since the governor may appoint a justice to fill a vacancy on …

Alj Control Of The Hearing: What Does An Alj Do About An Unruly Witness Or Obstreperous Attorney?, Allen E. Shoenberger

Faculty Publications & Other Works

No abstract provided.

An Outcomes Analysis Of Scope Of Review Standards, Paul R. Verkuil

Articles

No abstract provided.

Are You Willing To Make The Commitment In Writing? The Apa, Aljs, And Ssa, Jeffrey Scott Wolfe

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reducing The Democratic Deficit: Representation, Diversity, And The Canadian Judiciary, Or Towards A "Triple P" Judiciary, Richard Devlin Frsc, A. Wayne Mackay, Natasha Kim

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The authors review the current structures for judicial appointments in Canada and provide statistical information about the results of these mechanisms in respect to diversity of representation on the courts. They are also critical of the fairness and openness of judicial appointments processes. After examining several variants of the dominant liberal view of law and of judges, the authors proffer and articulate a neo-realist theory of law and what they term a "bungee cord theory of judging." According to the former, law is inevitably a form of politics; according to the latter, judges are unavoidably political actors. In consequence, the …

Commodities Rulings Appealable To Circuit (New York Law Journal), Daniel Wise

News Articles

No abstract provided.

Minority Protection In Residential Private Governments, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

The article explores the balance between majority rule and minority protections in community associations, drawing parallels with corporate governance to address conflicts and self-dealing issues. It argues that while market forces and self-interest often mitigate harmful majority actions, legal safeguards are necessary to protect minority interests, particularly when idiosyncratic value is at stake. The article advocates for express protections in governing documents and the use of supermajorities to limit association power, emphasizing that courts should invalidate redistributive actions without compensation.

Judicial Restraint In The Administrative State: Beyond The Countermajoritarian Difficulty, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

Arguments for judicial restraint point to some kind of judicial deficit (such as a democratic or an epistemic deficit) as grounds for limiting judicial review. ("Judicial review" is used in this Article to mean, essentially, the judicial invalidation of statutes, rules, orders and actions in virtue of the Bill of Rights, or similar unwritten criteria.). The most influential argument for judicial restraint has been the Countermajoritarian Difficulty. This is a legislature-centered argument: one that points to features of *legislatures*, as grounds for courts to refrain from invalidating *statutes*. This Article seeks to recast scholarly debate about judicial restraint, and to …

Standards Of Judicial Review In The Virginia Administrative Process Act, Mary Renae Carter

University of Richmond Law Review

Section 9-6.14:17 of the Virginia Administrative Process Act sets forth two standards by which courts may review the validity of a state agency's decisions. In formal rulemaking and adjudicatory proceedings, the statute requires an agency to keep a record of all evidence it receives and to make decisions based on this record. Upon review, a court will look to see if there is "substantial evidence" in the record to support the agency's findings of fact. In informal rulemaking and adjudicatory proceedings, the statute does not require an agency to keep an evidentiary record. If the agency has not voluntarily made …

An American Perspective On Environmental Impact Assessment In Australia, Mark Squillace

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Federal Administrative Judiciary: Establishing An Appropriate System Of Performance Evaluation For Alj's, Jeffrey Lubbers

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

John D. Appel, Leslie Berman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deference Running Riot: Separating Interpretation And Lawmaking Under Chevron, Michael E. Herz

Articles

No abstract provided.

Expanding The Judicial Power Of The Administrative Law Judge To Establish Efficiency And Fairness In Administrative Adjudication, C. Stuart Greer

University of Richmond Law Review

How is an administrative law judge ("ALJ") to know his role in the modern bureaucracy? On the one hand, the law requires the ALJ to adjudicate legal disputes between the government agency and the individual, and on the other hand, a black-robed member of the judicial branch in- structs him that he is out of his jurisdiction. Who wins in this decades-long battle for turf?

Revisiting Overton Park: Political And Judicial Controls Over Administrative Actions Affecting The Community, Peter L. Strauss

Faculty Scholarship

Overton Park is a 342-acre municipal park lying close to downtown Memphis, Tennessee, in one of that city's better residential areas. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe is a Supreme Court decision frequently cited for its general propositions about judicial review of informal administrative action that, to the citizens of Memphis, was one way-station in a more than two-decade struggle concerning whether and where an inner-city expressway, part of Interstate 40, would be built. Overall, the story of that struggle reveals a complex brew of national and local politics about the marriage of highway convenience to urban amenity; …

Due Process, Judicial Review, And The Rights Of The Individual, Edward D. Re

Cleveland State Law Review

As a federal judge I fully appreciate the role of the judiciary in reviewing the actions of administrative agencies. Hence, I am pleased to discuss the concepts of due process, judicial review, and the rights of the individual. Since it cannot be questioned that public officers and administrative agencies vitally affect the lives and interests of all persons, it is important to know the legal controls and remedies that are available to assure that public officials act lawfully. This, of course, implies that all administrators and officers of government must act within the bounds of their delegated authority and comply …

Specialized Courts In Administrative Law, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

Evaluating Judicial Capacity To Determine Public Welfare Values In Water Transfers, Charles T. Dumars

Moving the West's Water to New Uses: Winners and Losers (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

31 pages (includes illustrations).

Contains references.