Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Sec Vs. Sloan

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 15, 1978

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

47 entries 5 linked 42 unlinked
Show
  1. Southern Pacific Terminal Co. Vs. Icc US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1911
  2. WeinsteIn Vs. Bradford US Supreme Court · Dec 10, 1975
  3. Saxbe Vs. Bustos US Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1974
  4. United States Vs. Correll US Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1967
    Relied / Followed
  5. Epa Vs. Mink US Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1973
  6. U.S. 103 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court SEC v. Sloan
    Search
  7. U.S. 103 (1978) Securities and Exchange Commission v. Sloan
    Search
  8. will be subjected to the same action again. Cf. Weinstein v. Bradford
    Search
  9. its administrative construction with a contemporaneous well reasoned explanation of its action. Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United
    Search
  10. F.2d at 158, quoting from Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC
    Search
  11. Brief for Petitioner 15, quoting from Pet. for Cert. 12 n. 7. Cf. Weinstein v. Bradford
    Search
  12. before us this case falls squarely within the general principle first enunciated in Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC
    Search
  13. supra, and further clarified in Weinstein v. Bradford
    Search
  14. s protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, there is a reasonable expectation, within the meaning of Weinstein v. Bradford
    Search
  15. If extension of the summary suspension power is desirable, the proper source of that power is Congress. Cf. FMC v. Seatrain
    Search
  16. has been both consistent and longstanding, dating from 1944. It is thus entitled to great deference. See United States v. National
    Search
  17. detail the statutory authorization under which it took that action. As we said just this Term in Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United
    Search
  18. attention to the statutory authorization is especially important in light of this Court's pronouncement in Skidmore v. Swift
    Search
  19. deference by the courts, and ordinarily that construction will be affirmed if it has a 'reasonable basis in law.' NLRB v. Hearst
    Search
  20. Unemployment Commission v. Aragon
    Search
  21. U. S. 153 -154. But the courts are the final authorities on issues of statutory construction, FTC v. Colgate-Palmolive
    Search
  22. they deem inconsistent with a statutory mandate or that frustrate the congressional policy underlying a statute.' NLRB v. Brown
    Search
  23. Volkswagenwerk v. FMC
    Search
  24. with the statutory mandate. We explicitly contemplated just this Page 436 U. S. 119 situation in FMC v. Seatrain
    Search
  25. See Zuber v. Allen
    Search
  26. Fribourg Navigation Co. v. Commissioner
    Search
  27. illustrated by the cases upon which the Commission relies, we do not believe it to be applicable here. In Zuber v. Allen
    Search
  28. k). On this point, the present case differs significantly from United States v. Correll
    Search
  29. suffered collateral legal consequences from the series of suspension orders, and thus the case is not moot. Cf. Sibron v. New
    Search
  30. under which an agency purports to operate. Ante at 436 U. S. 117 , quoting Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United
    Search
  31. Page 436 U. S. 126 noted in dissent in Adamo, see id. at 434 U. S. 302 , Norwegian Nitrogen Co. v. United
    Search
  32. is excised, presumably as permitted (but not required) by Exemption 5 of the Freedom of Information Act, see EPA v. Mink
    Search
  33. U.S. Supreme Court SEC v. Sloan
    Search
  34. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Sloan
    Search
  35. Cf. Weinstein v. Bradford
    Search
  36. Adamo Wrecking Co. v. United
    Search
  37. of Weinstein v. Bradford
    Search
  38. Congress. Cf. FMC v. Seatrain
    Search
  39. See United States v. National
    Search
  40. Skidmore v. Swift
    Search
  41. NLRB v. Hearst
    Search
  42. FTC v. Colgate-Palmolive
    Search
  43. NLRB v. Brown
    Search
  44. FMC v. Seatrain
    Search
  45. In Zuber v. Allen
    Search
  46. Cf. Sibron v. New
    Search
  47. Norwegian Nitrogen Co. v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial