holding that the District Court had general federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 over nonfrivolous constitutional claims of agency bias and prejudgment
Summary of this case from Telecommunications Research Action v. F.C.CNo. 79-1463.
June 16, 1980.
C.A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 612 F. 2d 718.
holding that the District Court had general federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 over nonfrivolous constitutional claims of agency bias and prejudgment
Summary of this case from Telecommunications Research Action v. F.C.Cseeming to be ready to find a due process violation in rulemaking where agency member has unalterably closed mind on critical issue, despite Bi-Metallic Inv. Co. v. Colorado, 239 U.S. 441, 36 S.Ct. 141, 60 L.Ed. 372 (due process restrictions not applicable to legislative activities of administrative agency)
Summary of this case from Natural Resources Defense Coun. v. U.S.E.P.Aarguing in the context of a challenge to an FTC Commissioner's impartiality that the "jurisprudential concerns . . . embodied in the exhaustion doctrine, do not bear on whether a court has jurisdiction but only on whether it should exercise that jurisdiction"
Summary of this case from I.A.M. National Pension Fund Benefit Plan C v. Stockton Tri Industriesapplying Urbano factors
Summary of this case from Miller v. RutgersFull title:KLINE ET AL. v. BLAKE
Court:U.S.
Date published: Jun 16, 1980
Similarly, the Third and Sixth Circuits have held that although the question of Eleventh Amendment immunity…
Gulf Oil Corp. v. U.S. Dept. of EnergyOne requirement may be applicable even when the other is not." Association of National Advertisers, Inc. v.…