Ramaprakash v. Federal Aviation Administration

How courts have described this case

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

• \Agencies are free to change course as their expertise and experience may suggest or require.\
• \[F]ailure to come to grips with conflicting precedent constitutes an [agency's] inexcusable departure from the essential requirement of reasoned decision making.\
• “[FJailure to come to grips with conflicting precedent constitutes an [agency’s] inexcusable departure from the essential requirement of reasoned decision making.”
• “[FJailure to come to grips with conflicting precedent constitutes an [agency’s] inexcusable departure from the essential requirement of reasoned decision making.”
• agency must “provide a reasoned analysis indicating that prior policies and standards are being deliberately changed, not casually ignored”
• “[F]ailure to come to grips with conflicting precedent constitutes an [agency’s] inexcusable departure from the essential requirement of reasoned decision making.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).