Spencer v. Maryland State Board of Pharmacy

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that intermediate appellate court erred when it compelled an administrative agency to take specific action in a matter statute rily committed to the discretion of the agency
• deciding whether an agency has acted in excess of its jurisdiction is a question of law
• explaining that “[a]n agency’s prerogative with respect to case referral to the OAH is similar in scope to that of the agency’s prerogative in determining the severity of sanctions”
• reviewing, under an “arbitrary or capricious” standard, an administrative agency’s decision not to exercise its discretionary power to delegate a case to the Office of Administrative Hearings
• construing the word “may” “to signal the ordinary meaning of permission unless the context or the purpose of the statute shows that it is meant to be imperative”
• “Section 10-222(h)(3)(i)-(vi) provides a statutory framework for understanding the scope of judicial review of agency decisions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).