ST. JOHNS RIVER v. Consolidated-Tomoka

How courts have described this case

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

• interpreting sections 120.52(15) and 120.54(1)(a) as \suggest[ing] that rulemaking authority is not restricted to those situations in which the enabling statute details the precise subject of a proposed rule\
• interpreting \particular\ as requiring only that a (proposed) rule be \within the range of powers\ statutorily granted to the agency, and deeming (proposed) rules valid if \within the class of powers and duties identified in the statute to be implemented\
• interpreting a prior version of section 120.52, and concluding it “unlikely that the Legislature intended to establish a rulemaking standard based on the level of detail in the enabling statute, because such a standard would be unworkable”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).