Mimi Cutler, Stephen D. Annand and National Council of Senior Citizens v. Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that this factor requires a court to consider whether the “delay may be 12 undermining the statutory scheme”
• recognizing that claim preclusion may not attach where a prior case was determined on the issue of standing, but finding that “[p]rinciples of collateral estoppel [also known as issue preclusion] clearly apply to standing determinations”
• finding that “[t]he reasonableness of the delay must be judged ‘in the context of the statute’ which authorizes the agency’s action”
• finding that agency’s failure to raise exhaustion issue, paired with futility of exhaustion, constitutes waiver of the issue despite the fact that intervenor-defendant has raised the issue
• “Standing ranks amongst those questions of jurisdiction and justiciability not involving an adjudication on the merits, whose disposition will not bar relitigation of the cause of action originally asserted * * (footnote omitted)
• distinguishing the “enforceable statutory directive” to withdraw approval for unsafe drugs under 21 U.S.C. § 355(e) from typical FDA enforcement actions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).