Case briefs

Landmark case briefs across every law subject.

Browse 7757 source-linked case summaries searchable by name, citation, court, jurisdiction, practice area, and legal principle.

7,757
Case briefs
129
Jurisdictions
167
Practice areas
Showing 80 of 7,757 matching case briefs.

Marbury v. Madison

constitutional law

5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1803 · United States

Issue
Could the Supreme Court issue a writ of mandamus under the Judiciary Act of 1789?
Held
No. The statutory grant of original jurisdiction was unconstitutional.
Ratio
Federal courts have authority to review legislative acts for constitutional validity.
constitutional law
federal courts law

McCulloch v. Maryland

constitutional law

17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1819 · United States

Issue
Did Congress have power to charter the bank, and could Maryland tax it?
Held
Congress had implied power to create the bank, and Maryland could not tax it.
Ratio
Congress may use implied powers reasonably adapted to enumerated powers; states may not impede valid federal operations.
constitutional law
tax law

Gibbons v. Ogden

constitutional law

22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1824 · United States

Issue
Did the Commerce Clause allow Congress to regulate interstate navigation?
Held
Yes. Navigation was commerce, and the federal license controlled.
Ratio
The Commerce Clause reaches interstate navigation and displaces conflicting state monopolies.
constitutional law
commercial law

Dred Scott v. Sandford

constitutional law

60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1857 · United States

Issue
Could Scott sue in federal court and did Congress have power to restrict slavery in territories?
Held
The Court held against Scott; the decision was later displaced by constitutional amendment.
Ratio
The decision is not good law and is studied as a repudiated constitutional failure.
constitutional law
legal history

Plessy v. Ferguson

constitutional law

163 U.S. 537 (1896)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1896 · United States

Issue
Did state-mandated racial segregation violate equal protection?
Held
The Court upheld segregation; the rule was later repudiated.
Ratio
The case is overruled and studied for the rejected separate-but-equal doctrine.
constitutional law
civil rights law

Brown v. Board of Education

constitutional law

347 U.S. 483 (1954)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1954 · United States

Issue
Does racial segregation in public schools violate equal protection?
Held
Yes. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.
Ratio
State-imposed public school segregation violates the Equal Protection Clause.
constitutional law
education law
civil rights law

Gideon v. Wainwright

criminal law and procedure

372 U.S. 335 (1963)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1963 · United States

Issue
Does the Sixth Amendment right to counsel apply to state felony prosecutions?
Held
Yes. Indigent felony defendants must receive appointed counsel.
Ratio
States must provide counsel to indigent defendants charged with serious crimes.
criminal law and procedure
constitutional law

Miranda v. Arizona

criminal law and procedure

384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1966 · United States

Issue
What safeguards are required before custodial interrogation?
Held
Warnings are required to protect the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
Ratio
Before custodial interrogation, police must advise suspects of silence, counsel, and waiver rights.
criminal law and procedure
constitutional law

Mapp v. Ohio

criminal law and procedure

367 U.S. 643 (1961)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1961 · United States

Issue
Does the exclusionary rule apply to the states?
Held
Yes. Unconstitutionally obtained evidence is inadmissible in state criminal trials.
Ratio
Evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment is generally excluded in state and federal prosecutions.
criminal law and procedure
evidence law

Terry v. Ohio

criminal law and procedure

392 U.S. 1 (1968)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1968 · United States

Issue
Can police conduct a brief stop and frisk on less than probable cause?
Held
Yes, if supported by reasonable suspicion and limited to officer safety.
Ratio
A Terry stop requires reasonable suspicion; a frisk requires reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous.
criminal law and procedure
constitutional law

Roe v. Wade

constitutional law

410 U.S. 113 (1973)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1973 · United States

Issue
Did the Constitution protect a right to choose abortion under the Due Process Clause?
Held
The Court recognized such a right; the holding was later overruled by Dobbs.
Ratio
Roe is no longer controlling federal constitutional law after Dobbs.
constitutional law
reproductive law

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization

constitutional law

597 U.S. 215 (2022)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2022 · United States

Issue
Does the Constitution confer a right to abortion?
Held
No. The Court overruled Roe and Casey.
Ratio
Abortion regulation is generally returned to democratic processes, subject to rational basis review federally.
constitutional law
reproductive law

Obergefell v. Hodges

constitutional law

576 U.S. 644 (2015)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2015 · United States

Issue
Do due process and equal protection protect same-sex marriage?
Held
Yes. Same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
Ratio
States must license and recognize marriages between two people of the same sex.
constitutional law
family law

United States v. Lopez

constitutional law

514 U.S. 549 (1995)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1995 · United States

Issue
Was the statute a valid exercise of commerce power?
Held
No. The regulated conduct was not economic activity substantially affecting interstate commerce.
Ratio
Commerce power has judicially enforceable limits, especially for noneconomic local activity.
constitutional law
criminal law and procedure

Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

administrative law

467 U.S. 837 (1984)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1984 · United States

Issue
When should courts defer to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute?
Held
The Court articulated a two-step deference framework; that framework was later overruled by Loper Bright.
Ratio
Chevron deference is no longer controlling after Loper Bright but remains historically important.
administrative law
environmental law

Ridge v. Baldwin

administrative law

[1964] AC 40

House of Lords · 1964 · United Kingdom

Issue
Did natural justice require the decision-maker to hear Ridge before removing him from office?
Held
Yes. The dismissal was void because the committee failed to comply with basic procedural fairness.
Ratio
When a public body makes a decision affecting rights, office, or legitimate interests, procedural fairness may require notice of the case and an opportunity to be heard.
administrative law
constitutional law

Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v. Wednesbury Corporation

administrative law

[1948] 1 KB 223

Court of Appeal · 1948 · England & Wales

Issue
When will a court quash an administrative decision on grounds of unreasonableness?
Held
The challenge failed because the condition did not meet the very high threshold for legal unreasonableness.
Ratio
Wednesbury unreasonableness remains the classic high-threshold irrationality standard for judicial review, subject to later refinement in rights-sensitive contexts.
administrative law

Anisminic Ltd v. Foreign Compensation Commission

administrative law

[1969] 2 AC 147

House of Lords · 1969 · United Kingdom

Issue
Could the courts review a decision affected by legal error despite broad statutory wording attempting to exclude review?
Held
Yes. A purported determination infected by a material error of law was a nullity and not protected by the ouster clause.
Ratio
A material error of law can render an administrative decision reviewable even where legislation appears to exclude review.
administrative law

Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service

administrative law

[1985] AC 374

House of Lords · 1985 · United Kingdom

Issue
Are exercises of prerogative power in principle reviewable, and did the union have a procedural fairness claim?
Held
Prerogative powers are in principle reviewable, but the national security context defeated the challenge on the facts.
Ratio
The source of public power does not by itself immunise executive action from judicial review; justiciability and context remain critical.
administrative law
constitutional law

R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Daly

administrative law

[2001] 2 AC 532

House of Lords · 2001 · United Kingdom

Issue
Was the prison search policy lawful given the right of confidential access to legal advice?
Held
No. The policy was disproportionate and unlawfully interfered with an important constitutional right.
Ratio
Where a public decision interferes with fundamental rights, proportionality may require a more exacting form of review than classic irrationality alone.
administrative law
human rights law

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins

civil procedure

304 U.S. 64 (1938)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1938 · United States

Issue
May a federal court sitting in diversity apply federal general common law?
Held
No. Federal courts apply state substantive law in diversity cases.
Ratio
In diversity jurisdiction, federal courts apply state substantive law and federal procedural law.
civil procedure
federal courts law

International Shoe Co. v. Washington

civil procedure

326 U.S. 310 (1945)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1945 · United States

Issue
When may a state exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant?
Held
Jurisdiction was proper because the company had minimum contacts with Washington.
Ratio
Personal jurisdiction depends on minimum contacts and fairness.
civil procedure
constitutional law

Pennoyer v. Neff

civil procedure

95 U.S. 714 (1878)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1878 · United States

Issue
Could a state court bind an out-of-state defendant without personal service or attached property?
Held
No. The judgment was invalid for lack of jurisdiction.
Ratio
Traditional jurisdiction required presence, consent, domicile, or property control.
civil procedure
property law

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly

civil procedure

550 U.S. 544 (2007)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2007 · United States

Issue
What factual showing is required to survive a motion to dismiss?
Held
A complaint must plead enough facts to state a plausible claim.
Ratio
Federal pleadings must cross the line from conceivable to plausible.
civil procedure
antitrust law

Ashcroft v. Iqbal

civil procedure

556 U.S. 662 (2009)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2009 · United States

Issue
How should courts apply plausibility pleading to discrimination claims?
Held
The complaint did not plausibly plead purposeful discrimination by the named officials.
Ratio
Plausibility pleading applies across civil actions under the Federal Rules.
civil procedure
constitutional law

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

evidence law

509 U.S. 579 (1993)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1993 · United States

Issue
What standard governs admissibility of scientific expert testimony under Rule 702?
Held
Trial judges must act as gatekeepers for reliable, relevant expert testimony.
Ratio
Expert testimony must be reliable and fit the issues in the case.
evidence law
forensic evidence law

Crawford v. Washington

evidence law

541 U.S. 36 (2004)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2004 · United States

Issue
When does admission of testimonial hearsay violate the Confrontation Clause?
Held
Testimonial statements require unavailability and a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
Ratio
Testimonial hearsay is barred unless the witness is unavailable and previously subject to cross-examination.
evidence law
criminal law and procedure

Hadley v. Baxendale

contract law

9 Exch. 341, 156 Eng. Rep. 145 (1854)

Court of Exchequer · 1854 · England and Wales

Issue
Which consequential damages are recoverable for breach of contract?
Held
Only losses arising naturally or within the parties' contemplation are recoverable.
Ratio
Consequential damages require foreseeability at the time of contracting.
contract law
remedies law

Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.

contract law

[1893] 1 QB 256

Court of Appeal of England and Wales · 1893 · England and Wales

Issue
Was the advertisement an enforceable unilateral offer?
Held
Yes. The ad was a unilateral offer accepted by performance.
Ratio
A clear reward advertisement can create a unilateral contract accepted by performance.
contract law
consumer protection law

Donoghue v. Stevenson

tort law

[1932] AC 562

House of Lords · 1932 · United Kingdom

Issue
Did a manufacturer owe a duty of care to an ultimate consumer without privity?
Held
Yes. A manufacturer can owe a duty to foreseeable consumers.
Ratio
A person must take reasonable care to avoid acts likely to injure closely and directly affected neighbors.
tort law
consumer protection law

Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.

tort law

248 N.Y. 339 (1928)

New York Court of Appeals · 1928 · New York, United States

Issue
Was the railroad liable to an unforeseeable plaintiff?
Held
No. The risk to Palsgraf was not reasonably foreseeable.
Ratio
Negligence liability requires a duty to the plaintiff based on foreseeable risk.
tort law

MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.

tort law

217 N.Y. 382 (1916)

New York Court of Appeals · 1916 · New York, United States

Issue
Could the manufacturer owe a duty without contractual privity?
Held
Yes. Manufacturers owe duties for products likely to be dangerous if negligently made.
Ratio
Manufacturers can owe negligence duties to foreseeable users of dangerous products.
tort law
consumer protection law

Pierson v. Post

property law

3 Cai. R. 175 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1805)

Supreme Court of Judicature of New York · 1805 · New York, United States

Issue
Does pursuit alone create property rights in a wild animal?
Held
No. Occupancy required capture or mortal wounding.
Ratio
Property in wild animals generally requires actual possession or certain control.
property law

Moore v. Regents of the University of California

property law

51 Cal. 3d 120 (1990)

Supreme Court of California · 1990 · California, United States

Issue
Did the patient retain property rights in excised cells?
Held
No conversion claim, but fiduciary duty and informed consent claims could proceed.
Ratio
Patients may have disclosure-based claims even when conversion does not apply to excised cells.
property law
bioethics law
health law

Raffles v. Wichelhaus

contract law

2 H. & C. 906, 159 Eng. Rep. 375 (Ex. 1864)

Court of Exchequer · 1864 · England and Wales

Issue
Was there mutual assent when the parties meant different ships?
Held
No enforceable contract was found on the pleaded ambiguity.
Ratio
Mutual misunderstanding about a material term can prevent contract formation.
contract law

Lucy v. Zehmer

contract law

196 Va. 493 (1954)

Supreme Court of Virginia · 1954 · Virginia, United States

Issue
Does objective manifestation of assent control over undisclosed intent?
Held
Yes. The written agreement was enforceable.
Ratio
Contract assent is measured objectively by outward expression.
contract law
property law

Hamer v. Sidway

contract law

124 N.Y. 538 (1891)

New York Court of Appeals · 1891 · New York, United States

Issue
Was forbearance from legal rights valid consideration?
Held
Yes. The nephew's forbearance was sufficient consideration.
Ratio
Forbearance from a legal right can be valid consideration.
contract law

Hawkins v. McGee

contract law

84 N.H. 114 (1929)

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929 · New Hampshire, United States

Issue
How should damages be measured for breach of a promised surgical result?
Held
Expectation damages measured the difference between promised and actual result.
Ratio
Expectation damages place the plaintiff in the position performance would have produced.
contract law
remedies law

Kelo v. City of New London

property law

545 U.S. 469 (2005)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2005 · United States

Issue
Can economic development qualify as public use under the Fifth Amendment?
Held
Yes, under the deferential public purpose approach.
Ratio
Public use includes public purpose under federal takings doctrine.
property law
constitutional law

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council

property law

505 U.S. 1003 (1992)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1992 · United States

Issue
When does a regulation become a categorical taking?
Held
A regulation denying all economically beneficial use generally requires compensation.
Ratio
Total economic wipeouts are categorical takings subject to narrow exceptions.
property law
environmental law

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City

property law

438 U.S. 104 (1978)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1978 · United States

Issue
Did the landmark law effect a regulatory taking?
Held
No. The regulation did not go too far under an ad hoc balancing approach.
Ratio
Regulatory takings are often assessed by economic impact, expectations, and character of government action.
property law
land use law

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

constitutional law

567 U.S. 519 (2012)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2012 · United States

Issue
Could Congress enact the mandate and Medicaid expansion under enumerated powers?
Held
The mandate was sustained as a tax; the Medicaid expansion remedy was limited.
Ratio
Congress may tax conduct but may not coerce states through unduly punitive spending conditions.
constitutional law
health law

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

constitutional law

558 U.S. 310 (2010)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2010 · United States

Issue
May government restrict independent political expenditures by corporations?
Held
No. Such restrictions violated the First Amendment.
Ratio
Independent political expenditures receive strong First Amendment protection.
constitutional law
election law

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan

defamation law

376 U.S. 254 (1964)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1964 · United States

Issue
What constitutional fault standard applies to public official defamation claims?
Held
Public officials must prove actual malice.
Ratio
Public officials must show knowing falsity or reckless disregard for truth.
defamation law
first amendment law

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District

first amendment law

393 U.S. 503 (1969)

Supreme Court of the United States · 1969 · United States

Issue
Do students retain First Amendment rights at school?
Held
Yes, absent material and substantial disruption.
Ratio
Schools may restrict student speech only when it materially and substantially disrupts school operations or invades rights of others.
first amendment law
education law

R v. Dudley and Stephens

criminal law and procedure

14 QBD 273 (1884)

Queen's Bench Division · 1884 · England and Wales

Issue
Is necessity a defense to murder?
Held
No. Necessity was not a defense to intentional murder on these facts.
Ratio
Necessity generally does not excuse intentional killing of an innocent person.
criminal law and procedure

R v. R

criminal law and procedure

[1991] UKHL 12, [1992] 1 AC 599

House of Lords · 1991 · United Kingdom

Issue
Did a marital rape exemption remain part of common law?
Held
No. The exemption was no longer recognized.
Ratio
A spouse can be criminally liable for rape of the other spouse.
criminal law and procedure
family law

Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland

bioethics law

[1993] AC 789

House of Lords · 1993 · United Kingdom

Issue
Could treatment be lawfully withdrawn when continuation was not in the patient's best interests?
Held
Yes, with court approval on the facts.
Ratio
Life-sustaining treatment may be withdrawn where it is not in the patient's best interests, subject to legal safeguards.
bioethics law
health law

Salomon v. A Salomon & Co Ltd

business associations law

[1897] AC 22

House of Lords · 1897 · United Kingdom

Issue
Was the company a separate legal person from its shareholder?
Held
Yes. Properly incorporated companies have separate legal personality.
Ratio
A corporation is a separate legal person from its shareholders.
business associations law
corporate law

Foss v. Harbottle

business associations law

(1843) 2 Hare 461, 67 ER 189

Court of Chancery · 1843 · England and Wales

Issue
Who is the proper plaintiff for wrongs done to a company?
Held
The company is generally the proper plaintiff.
Ratio
Wrongs to a company are ordinarily enforced by the company, subject to exceptions.
business associations law
corporate law

Central London Property Trust Ltd v. High Trees House Ltd

contract law

[1947] KB 130

King's Bench Division · 1947 · England and Wales

Issue
Could a promise to accept less be enforced despite lack of consideration?
Held
The landlord could not recover wartime arrears for the reduced-rent period.
Ratio
A clear promise intended to be binding and relied upon may be enforceable as a shield through promissory estoppel.
contract law
equity law

Entores Ltd v. Miles Far East Corp.

contract law

[1955] 2 QB 327

Court of Appeal of England and Wales · 1955 · England and Wales

Issue
Where and when is acceptance effective for instantaneous communication?
Held
Acceptance was effective when received by the offeror.
Ratio
For instantaneous communications, acceptance generally occurs on receipt.
contract law
e commerce law

Caparo Industries plc v. Dickman

tort law

[1990] 2 AC 605

House of Lords · 1990 · United Kingdom

Issue
When does a duty of care arise for negligent misstatement?
Held
No duty was owed to investors for the takeover purpose.
Ratio
The Caparo test asks foreseeability, proximity, and fairness for novel duty situations.
tort law
professional responsibility law

Rylands v. Fletcher

tort law

(1868) LR 3 HL 330

House of Lords · 1868 · United Kingdom

Issue
Can liability attach without negligence for escape of dangerous things?
Held
Yes, under the rule for non-natural use and escape.
Ratio
Strict liability may apply for escape of dangerous things from non-natural land use.
tort law
environmental law

Bush v. Gore

election law

531 U.S. 98 (2000)

Supreme Court of the United States · 2000 · United States

Issue
Did the recount procedures violate equal protection?
Held
Yes, the recount as ordered violated equal protection and could not be completed in time.
Ratio
Election recount procedures must satisfy equal protection constraints.
election law
constitutional law

Mabo v Queensland (No 2)

advanced

(1992) 175 CLR 1

High Court of Australia · 1992 · Australia

Issue
Whether the common law doctrine of terra nullius applied in Australia and whether indigenous native title could survive the Crown's acquisition of sovereignty.
Held
The common law of Australia recognises a form of native title that reflects the entitlement of indigenous inhabitants to their traditional lands. The doctrine of terra nullius was wrongly applied.
Ratio
Native title is recognised at common law when the claimants can demonstrate a continuous connection to the land under traditional laws and customs, and the title has not been extinguished by a valid legislative or executive act.
African Customary Law
Indigenous Legal Systems
Constitutional Law

Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd

intermediate

[1964] AC 465

House of Lords · 1964 · United Kingdom

Issue
Whether a duty of care can arise for purely economic loss caused by a negligent misstatement even in the absence of a contractual relationship.
Held
A duty of care may arise when one party voluntarily assumes responsibility to give information or advice to another, and the other reasonably relies on it, but the disclaimer in this case negated liability.
Ratio
A duty of care in respect of pure economic loss may be established where (1) there is a special relationship based on an assumption of responsibility, (2) the claimant reasonably relies on the statement, and (3) the loss is a foreseeable consequence of negligence.
Agricultural Law
Banking Law
Commercial Law

Friedman v. Division of Administrative Law Appeals

intermediate

AC 23-P-369

Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2024 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
What is the proper standard of judicial review for a decision of the Massachusetts Division of Administrative Law Appeals, and what procedural protections apply in such administrative adjudications?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal the dispositive holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment before relying on it. The opinion likely addresses whether DALA's decision was supported by substantial evidence, was arbitrary or capricious, or violated due process.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a specific legal rule. Students should review the full opinion to extract the court's articulation of the standard of review for DALA decisions, which may include deference to agency factual findings if supported by substantial evidence, and de novo review of legal conclusions.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Judicial review of administrative decisions
Standard of review

Nathan E. MICHEL v. STATE of Louisiana, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

intermediate

167 So. 3d 654

Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2014 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
Does a statutory amendment that changes the procedures for administrative license suspension hearings apply retroactively, and does such application violate due process if it alters substantive rights?
Held
The source excerpt does not provide the majority holding explicitly, but the dissent indicates the majority concluded Act 559 was procedural and did not violate due process. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment. The dissent held that the amendment was a substantive change as applied to Michel and violated his due process rights.
Ratio
A statutory amendment governing administrative hearing procedures may be classified as procedural or substantive. If procedural, it may apply retroactively without violating due process; if substantive, retroactive application may infringe on vested rights and violate due process.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Procedural vs. substantive law
Due process in administrative hearings
Issue
What are the collective bargaining rights of administrative law judges under the Federal Labor-Management Relations Act, and to what extent can an agency unilaterally change working conditions without bargaining?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal the dispositive holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment. The opinion likely addresses whether the SSA's actions constituted an unfair labor practice or were within management rights.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a specific legal rule. Students should review the full opinion to extract the court's interpretation of the Federal Labor-Management Relations Act as applied to ALJs, including any limitations on bargaining over quasi-judicial functions.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Administrative law judges
Federal labor relations

Nathan E. MICHEL v. STATE of Louisiana, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

basic

159 So. 3d 1069

Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2015 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
Should the Louisiana Supreme Court review the Court of Appeal's decision regarding the constitutionality of retroactively applying Act 559's procedural changes to administrative license suspension hearings?
Held
The Louisiana Supreme Court denied the writ of certiorari, leaving the Court of Appeal's decision in place. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the denial does not constitute a ruling on the merits, but it indicates the Court of Appeal's decision stands as the final judgment.
Ratio
A denial of a writ of certiorari by a state supreme court has no precedential value on the merits but leaves the lower court's decision as binding authority in that jurisdiction.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Appellate review
Finality of administrative decisions

THOMAS BOLLAY, and v. OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, and Respondent STATE LANDS COMMISSION, Real Party in Interest and

intermediate

193 Cal. App. 4th 103

California Court of Appeal · 2011 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
Is a policy of the State Lands Commission defining the mean high tide line a valid exercise of administrative authority, and what standard of review applies to such a policy?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal the dispositive holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment. The opinion likely addresses whether the policy constitutes a regulation that required formal rulemaking under the APA, and whether the Commission's interpretation of the mean high tide line is correct.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a specific legal rule. Students should review the full opinion to extract the court's analysis of whether an agency policy is a regulation subject to APA rulemaking requirements, and the deference owed to agency interpretations of statutes they administer.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Agency rulemaking vs. policy
Standard of review for agency interpretations

Lighthouse Masonry, Inc., & anothe v. Division of Administrative Law Appeals & another

intermediate

466 Mass. 692

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
What is the proper process for appealing civil citations for prevailing wage law violations, and what standard of review applies to DALA's factual findings and legal conclusions?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal the dispositive holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment. The opinion likely addresses whether DALA's decision was supported by substantial evidence and whether the agency correctly interpreted the prevailing wage statute.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a specific legal rule. Students should review the full opinion to extract the court's guidance on the burden of proof in prevailing wage enforcement actions, the admissibility of evidence in DALA hearings, and the standard of judicial review.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Administrative adjudication
Judicial review of agency enforcement actions

Barber v. D.C. Commission on Selection and Tenure of Administrative Law Judges

advanced

19-CV-266, 19-CV-670 & 19-CV-1242

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2021 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
What are the statutory and constitutional requirements for the selection and tenure of administrative law judges in the District of Columbia, and did the Commission's actions violate those requirements?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal the dispositive holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment. The opinion likely addresses whether the Commission properly applied the D.C. Code provisions governing ALJ appointments and whether the appellants were denied due process.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a specific legal rule. Students should review the full opinion to extract the court's interpretation of the D.C. ALJ selection statute and any constitutional protections for ALJ tenure.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
ALJ selection and tenure
Due process in employment decisions
Issue
What is the proper standard of judicial review for a decision of the Texas State Office of Administrative Hearings, and did the ALJ's decision comply with statutory and constitutional requirements?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal the dispositive holding. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment. The opinion likely addresses whether the ALJ's findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the agency acted within its authority.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a specific legal rule. Students should review the full opinion to extract the court's application of the substantial evidence rule and any deference to agency interpretations of law under Texas administrative law.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Judicial review of administrative decisions
Substantial evidence standard
Issue
What are the procedural requirements for perfecting an appeal from a State Office of Administrative Hearings decision in Texas?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal any holding; it is merely a docket entry showing acceptance of the case. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment from the subsequent opinion.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a legal rule. It serves as a procedural checkpoint, reminding students that administrative appeals must be timely filed and accepted by the appellate court.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Appellate procedure
Administrative appeal process
Issue
What are the subsequent procedural steps after an administrative appeal is accepted in Texas?
Held
The source excerpt does not reveal any holding; it is a docket entry. This is a source-linked holding checkpoint; the candidate should confirm the full judgment from the final opinion.
Ratio
The source record does not provide a legal rule. It serves as a reminder that administrative appeals involve multiple procedural stages before a merits decision.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
Appellate procedure
Case management in administrative appeals
Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission v. Joseph Divincenzo and Jorge Martinez (Office of Administrative Law)

basic

445 N.J. Super. 187

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2016 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research
Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

Caryn Hines & Claudia Barber v. DC Commission on Selection & Tenure of Administrative Law Judges of the Office of Administrative Hearings

basic

16-AA-735 & 16-AA-867

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research
Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES, Et Al., Plaintiffs, v. U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Et Al., Defendants

basic

640 F. Supp. 2d 66

District Court, District of Columbia · 2009 · United States

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

Association of Administrative Law Judges v. United States Office of Personnel Management

basic

Civil Action No. 2007-0711

District Court, District of Columbia · 2009 · United States

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

basic

365 U.S. App. D.C. 6

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2005 · United States

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES, Et Al., Plaintiffs, v. U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Et Al., Defendants

basic

533 F. Supp. 2d 155

District Court, District of Columbia · 2008 · United States

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research
Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research

Salisbury Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, Inc. v. Division of Administrative Law Appeals & another

basic

448 Mass. 365

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007 · Jurisdiction from source

Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research
Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research
Issue
What Administrative Law issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
administrative-law
Administrative Law
source verification
case research