Shands Jacksonville Medical Center, Inc. v. Sebelius

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the first Allied- Signal factor weighed in favor of vacatur where the “flaw in the notice and comment process was substantial,” and the court was not convinced that HHS would be able to justify its decision on remand
• indicating that the Secretary's failure to comply with the expedited schedule \may counsel in favor of vacatur of the rule\
• indicating that the Secretary’s failure to comply with the expedited schedule “may counsel in favor of vacatur of the rule”
• finding that “the Secretary’s failure to disclose the critical assumptions relied upon by the HHS actuaries deprived Plaintiffs and other members of the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment”
• explaining that the Circuit “has ‘not been hospitable to government claims of harmless error in cases’ involving a failure of notice and comment” (quoting Allina Health Servs. v. Sebelius, 746 F.3d 1102, 1109 (D.C. Cir. 2014))
• collecting cases showing adjustments are acceptable so long as they are minor enough to be fairly characterized as only “adjustments”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).