Samuel G. Kooritzky v. Robert B. Reich, Secretary of Labor

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a notice of proposed rulemaking contained “not the merest hint” of a prohibition in the final rule
• holding agency violated § 553 where proposed rulemaking “contain[ed] nothing, not the merest hint, to suggest” it would amend a regulation
• ‘‘It is an elementary principle of rulemaking that a final rule need not match the rule proposed, indeed must not if the record demands a change.’’
• “It is an elementary principle of rulemaking that a final rule need not match the rule proposed, indeed must not if the record demands a change.”
• “Something is not a logical outgrowth of nothing.”
• “Something is not a logical outgrowth of nothing.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).