Canonsburg General Hospital v. Sylvia Mathews Burwell

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that Chenery applies to determinations that Congress specifically entrusted to an agency’s expertise, not general legal principles like issue preclusion
• acknowledging that preclusion is inappropriate if the “prior proceedings were seriously defective”
• “[A]n agency’s failure to raise issue preclusion in its answer in federal court may constitute waiver.”
• “[A]n agency’s failure to raise issue preclusion in its answer in federal court may constitute waiver.”
• 'Chenery applies only to “determinations specifically entrusted to an agency’s expertise,” not “legal principles” of the sort “that a court usually makes”
• “We have explained that Chenery only limits judicial review of factual determinations or policy judgments that the agency alone is authorized to make” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).