LEWES DAIRY, INC., ET AL.

v.

HARDIN, SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE

Citator

Cited By (24 total)

• SP/4 A. R. Montgomery, IV v. Rumsfeld, 572 F.2d 250 (9th Cir. 1978)
  …“agency” as used in this section apparently includes the Army. 5 U.S.C. § 701(b)(1). See Ornato v. Hoffman, 546 F. 2d 10, 14 (2d Cir. 1976); United States ex rel. Schonbrun v. Commanding Officer, 403 F. 2d 371, 375 n.2 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 929, 89 S.Ct. 1195, 22 L.Ed.2d 460 (1969). There is language in Consolidated Mines, supra, 455 F. 2d at 440, arguably suggesting that not only does section 10(c) not require the exhaustion of intra-agency appeals not mandated by statute or regulation,…
• Cortright v. Resor, 447 F.2d 245 (2d Cir. 1971)
  …e credit union may not be prohibited from distributing antiwar literature near base or from on-base conversation with officer).2 This is a case unlike United States ex rel. Schonbrun v. Commanding Officer, 403 F. 2d 371 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 929, 89 S.Ct. 1195, 22 L.Ed.2d 460 (1969), where only an abuse of military discretion was claimed. Here we are dealing with freedom of expression, still a most basic constitutional right. New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 91 S.Ct. 2140,…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Nixon v. Secretary OF the Navy, 422 F.2d 934 (2d Cir. 1970)
  …best left to the military, and the courts should not play a role in reviewing the exercise of discretionary military decisions. But as we noted in United States ex rel. Schonbrun v. Commanding Officer, 403 F. 2d 371, 374 (2 Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 929, 89 S.Ct. 1195, 22 L.Ed.2d 460 (1969), there are certain limitations to this “hands-off” policy, and official military conduct may go so far beyond the limits of what may be considered a rational exercise of discretion as to call for mandamus. Appel…