Supreme Court· 4/26/1965

Udall v. Tallman

Citations

380 U.S. 1
85 S. Ct. 792
13 L. Ed. 2d 616
1965 U.S. LEXIS 2228

How courts have described this case

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

holding that when a regulation must be interpreted, “a court must necessarily look to the administrative construction of the regulation if the meaning of the words used is in doubt”
noting that the Supreme Court “gives great deference to the interpretation given the statute by the officers or agency charged with its administration”
noting that the Supreme Court \gives great deference to the interpretation given the statute by the officers or agency charged with its administration\
noting that the Supreme Court “gives great deference to the interpretation given the statute by the officers or agency charged with its administration”
noting that “[w]hen the construction of an administrative regulation rather than a statute is in issue, deference is even more clearly in order”
noting that this deference is even greater than that afforded an agency’s construction of a statute it administers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Warren, Douglas, Harlan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2,574 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Udall v. Tallman

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.