Noren v. Beck, Civ. No. 2139.
| Court | United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California) |
| Writing for the Court | Edson Abel, Middletown, Cal., for plaintiffs |
| Citation | 199 F. Supp. 708 |
| Parties | Leonard S. NOREN and Harry C. Perry, Plaintiffs, v. Walter E. BECK, as Manager of the United States Land Office at Sacramento, California, et al., Defendants. |
| Decision Date | 21 November 1961 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 2139. |
199 F. Supp. 708
Leonard S. NOREN and Harry C. Perry, Plaintiffs,
v.
Walter E. BECK, as Manager of the United States Land Office at Sacramento, California, et al., Defendants.
Civ. No. 2139.
United States District Court S. D. California, N. D.
November 21, 1961.
Edson Abel, Middletown, Cal., for plaintiffs.
Francis C. Whelan, U. S. Atty., Melvin C. Blum, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for defendants.
CROCKER, District Judge.
This is an action wherein plaintiffs seek, under the provisions of Title 5 United States Code Annotated § 1009(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act, a trial de novo concerning various administrative determinations made within the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, in connection with certain land entries filed by them.
The plaintiffs, among other things, allege in their complaint that the administrative action within the Department of the Interior was "arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory, unlawful, illegal, and a denial of rights accorded plaintiffs, in that the soil in the case of all * * * applications heretofore mentioned was and is of substantially the same type and character and in truth and in fact the land in each of the * * * applications for desert land entry heretofore mentioned was and is land, not timber or known mineral, which by appropriate
This matter has progressed up to the point where the court set the matter for pretrial hearing pursuant to Local Rule 9 of Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, West's Ann.Code. At this time the defendants filed their motion for an order relieving them from complying with said Local Rule 9 and for an order submitting the case upon an agreed statement of facts, to wit, the administrative record, contending that the scope of judicial review by a district court is limited to a review of the administrative record, and not a trial de novo.
Title 5 United States Code Annotated, § 1009(e), defines the scope of judicial review, and after setting forth the grounds therefor, included in which are the grounds of arbitrariness, capriciousness, etc., states the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coleman v. United States, No. 20227.
...this Circuit, that although the Administrative Procedure Act does not permit a trial de novo of administrative decisions, Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 (D.C. S.D.Cal.1961); Adams v. United States, 318 F.2d 861 (9 CCA 1963), it does authorize and require judicial review under the standards ......
-
Sierra Club v. Hardin, Civ. No. A-16-70.
...a decision based upon substantial evidence even if it would have reached a different decision were the trial de novo. 32 Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 (S.D. Cal.1961), in which the court limited the scope of review to the departmental record, despite the plaintiff's protestations that no f......
-
Community National Bank of Pontiac v. Saxon, No. 14876.
...Altmeyer, 137 F.2d 531 (C.A. 2). See, also, United States v. Shimer, 367 U.S. 374, 381-382, 81 S.Ct. 1554, 6 L.Ed.2d 908; Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 The District Court found and concluded, after an extensive hearing of evidence and a consideration of the applicable Michigan authorities,......
-
Attocknie v. Udall, Civ. No. 66-316.
...States, 252 U.S. 450, 40 S.Ct. 410, 64 L.Ed. 659 (1920); Foster v. Seaton, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 253, 271 F.2d 836 (1959); Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 (S.D.Cal.1961). Therefore, the function of this Court is limited to a review of the administrative record relating to the approval of the dece......
-
Coleman v. United States, No. 20227.
...this Circuit, that although the Administrative Procedure Act does not permit a trial de novo of administrative decisions, Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 (D.C. S.D.Cal.1961); Adams v. United States, 318 F.2d 861 (9 CCA 1963), it does authorize and require judicial review under the standards ......
-
Sierra Club v. Hardin, Civ. No. A-16-70.
...a decision based upon substantial evidence even if it would have reached a different decision were the trial de novo. 32 Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 (S.D. Cal.1961), in which the court limited the scope of review to the departmental record, despite the plaintiff's protestations that no f......
-
Community National Bank of Pontiac v. Saxon, No. 14876.
...Altmeyer, 137 F.2d 531 (C.A. 2). See, also, United States v. Shimer, 367 U.S. 374, 381-382, 81 S.Ct. 1554, 6 L.Ed.2d 908; Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 The District Court found and concluded, after an extensive hearing of evidence and a consideration of the applicable Michigan authorities,......
-
Attocknie v. Udall, Civ. No. 66-316.
...States, 252 U.S. 450, 40 S.Ct. 410, 64 L.Ed. 659 (1920); Foster v. Seaton, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 253, 271 F.2d 836 (1959); Noren v. Beck, 199 F.Supp. 708 (S.D.Cal.1961). Therefore, the function of this Court is limited to a review of the administrative record relating to the approval of the dece......