Levinson v. Delaware Compensation Rating Bureau, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that exhaustion of administrative remedies is not required if a prompt decision in the public interest is needed, if the case does not involve administrative expertise or discretion, or if irreparable harm would result
• “application of the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies may result in dismissal from the judicial forum” (emphasis added) (citation omitted)
• “This Court has held that judicial admissions which are binding on the tendering party are limited to factual matters in issue and not to statements of legal theories or conceptions.”
• “[W]here a remedy before an administrative agency is provided, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will either review any action by the agency or provide an independent remedy.”
• “[W]here a remedy before an administrative agency is provided, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will either review any action by the agency or provide an independent remedy.”
• “Given the strong presumption in favor of such exhaustion and in the absence of any compelling argument to the contrary, DCRB should have been required, as a matter of law, to exhaust its administrative remedy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).