Administrative Law - Fall 2005

1
Chapter 4

• Part III

2
Loudermill at the United States Supreme Court

• This was an employment case dealing with due
  process rights
• The state claimed that it could modify (reduce)
  due process rights as a condition of employment
• How is this supported by the "bitter with the
  sweet" doctrine?
• Why do you think 8 members of the United States
  Supreme Court rejected this argument?
• What would such a theory do to due process?

3
Gilbert v. Homar, 520 U.S. 924 (1997)

• Who did the guard work for?
• Why did this make his arrest for marijuana
  possession a particular problem?
• Did he get any due process prior to this
  suspension from the workplace?
• Why?
• What are the limits of this opinion?
• Why should he get any pre-termination due process?

4
Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975)

• School suspension
• What due process did the court require?
• What was the Mathews analysis?

5
Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977)

• School paddling case
• What due process did the court require?
• What was the Mathews analysis?
• How does the analysis differ from Goss?
• Why?
• Do we still paddle students?
• Why not?

6
Board of Curators of the Univ. of Missouri v.
Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (1978)

• Academic suspension case for a medical student
• What due process did the court require?
• What was the Mathews analysis?
• Would this analysis differ if this had been a
  disciplinary suspension?

7
Law School Disciple and Due Process

• In Mathews terms, what are the issues in
  providing due process for academic issues?
• What are the potential costs, beyond time and
  money?
• How do we tell whether it is an academic or
  disciplinary issue?
• What about plagiarism? Cheating?
• Why is the Mathews basis for treating academic
  and disciplinary issues differently?

8
What does a Right to an Impartial Judge Mean?

• What about economic interests?
• What does separation of functions mean?
• Did the United States Supreme Court find that
  this was Constitutionally necessary, i.e., if not
  required by the APA?
• What happened in Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35
  (1975), the medical licensing case?
• Note - LA is not so clear on this

9
Disqualifying an Administrative Law Decisionmaker
for Bias

• What is the United States Supreme Court standard?
• What does it take to show this?
• What happened in Texaco, Inc. v. FTC, 336 F.2d
  754 (D.C. Cir. 1964)?
• Would generalized statements, such as the FCC
  chair deploring advertising to children, meet the
  standard?

10
Pillsbury Co. v. FTC, 354 F.2d 952 (5th Cir. 1966)

• Who was meddling in the FTC case?
• What did the court find?
• What is allowed for pending cases?
• What is the analysis if it had been the
  president?
• How does this change the issues?

11
Expertise v. Special Knowledge

• It is generally seen as a good thing for ALJs to
  know about the areas in which they hear cases
• When does this become a problem?
• Why?

12
Ex Parte Communications

• Why do ex parte communications impinge the rights
  of the regulated party?
• Does it matter whether they come from inside or
  outside the agency?
• How can the harm be cured?

13
Emergency Circumstances
14
North American Cold Storage

• What type of property is at issue?
• New property or old property?
• Why does the city want to do?
• Why?
• Is this a taking?
• Compensation analysis
• Public use analysis

15
What Process was the Defendant Entitled To?

• What process did the city provide?
• What process did the defendant claim he was
  entitled to?
• What process does the court say is
  constitutionally mandated?
• What is their rationale?
• What is defendant's remedy if the city is wrong?

16
(No Transcript)
17
Doggie Due Process

• The Saga of "Tut-Tut," "Bandit," "Boo Boo," and
  "Sadie"

18
Altman v. City of High Point, N.C., 330 F.3d 194
(4th Cir.(N.C.) 2003)

• What is a dog "at large"
• What happened to plaintiff's dog?
• Where was this done?
• Why was this done?
• What due process was provided?
• How did plaintiff characterize the act in legal
  terms?

19
Plaintiff's Legal Claims

• Plaintiff claims under 42 USC 1983
• Violation of a person's civil rights under the
  color of law
• Whose rights are violated?
• What is the constitutional claim, i.e., what part
  of the constitution has been violated?

20
The Characterization of a Dog

• What is the legal classification issue that
  plaintiff must address to state a 42 USC 1983
  claim?
• Does the Constitution mention dogs?
• What class of animal does a dog fall into?
• Is it an animal ferae naturae?
• Is it the same as a cow?
• Why?
• What type of property does the court hold the dog
  to be?

21
Deprivation of Property

• Must the government pay compensation if it takes
  this sort of property?
• Is this a taking?
• How does the government characterize killing the
  dogs?
• Did the court find the dog had been seized?
• Is a seizure the same as a taking?

22
Court's Factual Analysis

• What are the self-defense issues?
• Should these matter?
• The dissent says that this was a clear
  constitutional violation based on violations of
  federal law
• Did the majority find a federal dog protection
  act?

23
Add the Adlaw Context

• What is the Mathews analysis for this case?
• What is justification for the summary action?
• How is the dog like the bad chicken in North
  American?

24
Qualified Immunity

• We will return to this later in the course when
  look hard at 42 USC 1983

25
Doctrine of Necessity

• What is the Doctrine of Necessity?
• Why is it necessary?
• What examples might Katrina have posed?
• What does it tell us about the necessity of
  detailed laws trying to predict what will be
  necessary in an emergency?
• How might it arise in the judicial proceedings?

26
(No Transcript)