Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below:
PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from
The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™:
Choose Your Subscription:
--OR--
Register and Subscribe Now
Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below:
PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from
The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™:
Choose Your Subscription:
--OR--
Brief Fact Summary. This is the Supreme Court’s review of Bell Aerospace Co. v. NLRB, 475 F.2d 485.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. An agency may reverse itself so long as “adverse consequences ensuing from [the] reliance [by a party on that precedence] are so substantial that the [agency] should be precluded from reconsidering the issue in an adjudicative proceeding.”
We have also recognized that subsequent legislation declaring the intent of an earlier statute is entitled to significant weight.
View Full Point of Law
Issue. “[W]hether on remand the Board must invoke its rulemaking procedures if it determines, in light of our opinion, that these buyers are not ‘managerial employees’ under the Act.”
Held. No. The Supreme Court noted that “nothing in the present case” qualified as “an abuse of discretion or a violation” of the enabling statute. Adjudication was a perfectly valid remedy.
Discussion. “[S]urely the Board has discretion to decide that the relevant information necessary to mature and fair consideration of the issues.”