Asarco, Inc. v. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that the trial court “substitute[d] its judgment for that of the agency” in considering expert testimony that was not before the agency decisionmakers
• cautioning that reviewing evidence that was \considered for the purpose of judging the wisdom of the\ agency \necessarily led the district court to substitute its judgment for that of the agency\
• finding district court to have improperly considered expert testimony outside of the administrative record
• finding district court to have improperly considered expert testimony outside of the administrative record
• “any additional material should be explanatory in nature, such as requiring the involved administrative officials to demonstrate the basis for their action”
• “Consideration of [extra-record] evidence to determine the correctness or wisdom of the agency’s decision is not permitted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).