Harvard Pilgrim Health Care of New England v. Thompson

How courts have described this case

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

• denying discovery on constitutional claims and stating that “[t]he APA’s restriction of judicial review to the administrative record would be meaningless if any party seeking review based on . . . constitutional deficiencies was entitled to broad-ranging discovery”
• in procedural due process challenge to agency adjudication, no claim about a suspect class or hidden animus
• “A lack of specialization affects the weight of the expert’s 12 testimony, not its admissibility.”
• “The APA’s restriction of judicial review to the administrative record would be meaningless if any party seeking review based on ... constitutional deficiencies was entitled to broad-ranging discovery.”
• \The APA's restriction of judicial review to the administrative record would be meaningless if any party seeking review based on statutory or constitutional deficiencies was entitled to broad-ranging discovery.\
• “The APA’s restriction of judicial review to the administrative record would be meaningless if any party seeking review based on statutory or constitutional deficiencies was entitled to broad-ranging discovery.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).