In Re Four Oaks Place Operating, L.P. v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the \Supreme Court has held in any number of contexts that 'shall' is 'explicitly mandatory' language\
• noting that the “Supreme Court has held in any number of contexts that ‘shall’ is ‘explicitly mandatory’ language”
• explaining that courts determining whether or hot to excuse exhaustion on the grounds of futility in the Medicare conitext must consider whether “judicial resolution of the statutory issue (1) will not interfere with the agency’s efficient functioning; (2
• noting that the Act’s requirement of a final decision is “more than simply a codification of the judicially developed doctrine of exhaustion, and may not be dispensed with merely by a judicial conclusion of futility” (citation omitted)
• excusing exhaustion requirement on futility grounds where \the Secretary g[ave] no reason to believe that the agency machinery might accede to plaintiffs' claims\
• excusing exhaustion requirement on futility grounds where “the Secretary g[ave] no reason to believe that the agency machinery might accede to plaintiffs’ claims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).