DOCSLIB.ORG

Tuesday, January 05, 2010 11:35:01 EST Client ID/Project Name: Number of Lines: 199 Job Number: 1861:196830226

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tuesday, January 05, 2010 11:35:01 EST Client ID/Project Name: Number of Lines: 199 Job Number: 1861:196830226 1225VR Time of Request: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 11:35:01 EST Client ID/Project Name: Number of Lines: 199 Job Number: 1861:196830226 Research Information Service: LEXSEE(R) Feature Print Request: Current Document: 1 Source: Get by LEXSEE(R) Search Terms: 285 ark. 397 Send to: MILLER, ROD ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT LIBRARY 625 MARSHALL ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201-1054 Page 1 LEXSEE 285 ARK. 397 REHAB HOSPITAL SERVICES CORP. v. DELTA-HILLS HEALTH SYSTEMS AGENCY, INC.; and Frances FLENER, Individually and as Executive Director of Delta-Hills Health Systems Agency, Inc. No. 85-2 Supreme Court of Arkansas 285 Ark. 397; 687 S.W.2d 840; 1985 Ark. LEXIS 1928; 11 Media L. Rep. 1929 April 15, 1985, Opinion delivered PRIOR HISTORY: [***1] Appeal from Jackson As such, the parties are required to exhaust administrative Circuit Court; Andrew G. Ponder, Judge. remedies prior to seeking a declaratory judgment. DISPOSITION: Affirmed. Administrative Law > Judicial Review > Reviewability > LexisNexis(R) Headnotes Exhaustion of Remedies Civil Procedure > Justiciability > Exhaustion of Remedies > Administrative Remedies Civil Procedure > Declaratory Judgment Actions > State Judgments > General Overview Administrative Law > Governmental Information > [HN3] The Supreme Court of Arkansas requires Freedom of Information > Enforcement > Reviewability exhaustion of administrative remedies before resorting to > Jurisdiction & Venue an action for declaratory judgment. Civil Procedure > Judgments > Relief From Judgment > Motions to Alter & Amend Governments > Courts > Rule Application & Administrative Law > Judicial Review > Reviewability > Interpretation Exhaustion of Remedies [HN1] Jurisdiction to interpret the Freedom of [HN4] A basic rule of administrative procedure requires Information Act is in the Supreme Court of Arkansas. that the agency be given the opportunity to address a Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 29(1)(c). question before resorting to the courts. Administrative Law > Judicial Review > Reviewability > Administrative Law > Agency Adjudication > Review of Exhaustion of Remedies Initial Decisions Civil Procedure > Justiciability > Exhaustion of Administrative Law > Judicial Review > Reviewability > Remedies > Administrative Remedies Exhaustion of Remedies Civil Procedure > Declaratory Judgment Actions > Civil Procedure > Declaratory Judgment Actions > State Judgments > General Overview State Judgments > Appellate Review [HN2] Declaratory judgment actions are intended to [HN5] The procedure of The Arkansas State Health supplement rather than replace ordinary causes of action. Planning and Development Agency provides for further administrative review of the agency's decision before Page 2 285 Ark. 397, *; 687 S.W.2d 840, **; 1985 Ark. LEXIS 1928, ***1; 11 Media L. Rep. 1929 resorting to the courts. S.H.P.D.A. Rule 11(13). declaratory judgment. 3. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- Administrative Law > Governmental Information > Applicable to State Organizations Supported in Part by Freedom of Information > General Overview Public Funds. -- The Freedom of Information Act applies [HN6] The Freedom of Information Act applies to all to all organizations of the State supported wholly or in organizations of the State supported wholly or in part by part by public funds, except as otherwise specifically public funds, except as otherwise specifically provided by provided by law. law. 4. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- Violation Found. -- Where appellee is incorporated as a Administrative Law > Governmental Information > non-profit regional health planning corporation under the Freedom of Information > General Overview requirements of federal law which also provides that Governments > Legislation > Statutory Remedies & adequate public notice must be given and that business Rights must be conducted in public meetings, appellee's primary [HN7] The Freedom of Information Act expressly source of funding is the federal government, and appellee establishes criminal penalties for willful violations of the gave no emergency notice to the press or claims that any statute, Ark. Stat. Ann. § 12-2807, and a mechanism by emergency exception [***2] was involved, appellee did which one denied rights under the act may challenge that violate the terms of Ark. Stat. Ann. § 12-2805 of the denial. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 12-2806. Freedom of Information Act by making a private telephone poll of most of the Executive Committee of Administrative Law > Governmental Information > appellee's board. Freedom of Information > General Overview [HN8] The Supreme Court of Arkansas holds that some 5. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- actions taken in violation of the requirements of the Remedies for Violation Decision Made in Executive Freedom of Information Act may be voidable. The Session. -- When a public entity fails to reconvene in Supreme Court will develop this law on invalidation on a public session and ratify a matter, after arriving at a case-by-case basis. decision in executive session, it shall not be legal. [Ark. Stat. Ann. § 12-2805.] Administrative Law > Governmental Information > 6. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- Freedom of Information > Remedies > General Remedies -- Violative Acts Voidable. -- Some actions Overview taken in violation of the requirements of the Freedom of [HN9] It is only in the event that invalidation is sought Information Act may be voidable. that the Supreme Court of Arkansas requires that the board or agency be given the opportunity to address the 7. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- issue. The opportunity to address the issue does not Invalidation Law must be Developed on a Case-by-Case necessarily have to be given to the agency when the Basis. -- This law on invalidation under the Freedom of public or the press seeks only those remedies expressly Information Act must be developed on a case-by-case set out in the Freedom of Information Act. basis. 8. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- HEADNOTES Voidability not Invoked. -- Where the agency was never 1. Declaratory Judgments -- Supplemental to given a chance to address the issue of its violation of the Ordinary Causes of Action. -- Declaratory judgment Freedom of Information Act, the full board had already actions are intended to supplement rather than replace met in an open meeting and voted to contest the granting ordinary causes of action. of the certificate [***3] of need, and the appellant does not seek to protect the public's right to information, the 2. Declaratory Judgments -- Parties must Exhaust court declines to invoke voidability in this case. Administrative Remedies. -- The parties are required to exhaust administrative remedies prior to seeking a 9. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- Agency Page 3 285 Ark. 397, *; 687 S.W.2d 840, **; 1985 Ark. LEXIS 1928, ***3; 11 Media L. Rep. 1929 Right to Address Issue. -- It is only in the event judgment. invalidation is sought that the board or agency must be given the opportunity to address the issue of its violation; It seems to be now a recognized doctrine the opportunity to address the violation does not that requires administrative relief to be necessarily have to be given to the agency when the sought [***5] before resorting to public or the press seeks only those remedies expressly declaratory procedure, wherever set out in the Act. administrative [**842] relief is afforded and this requirement is not one merely 10. Records -- Freedom of Information Act -- Public requiring the initiation of administrative Meeting not Always Necessary. -- Where the full board procedure, but the administrative had already met in an open meeting and voted to contest procedure must be pursued to its final the granting of the certificate of need, there was no need conclusion before resort may be had to the for the board, or any committee, to meet and vote on each court for declaratory relief. step of the adjudication. W. Anderson, Actions for Declaratory Judgments, § 204, COUNSEL: Hilburn, Calhoon, Forster, Harper & at 433 (1951). [HN3] This court likewise requires Pruniski, Ltd., by: Sam Hilburn and Janet James Robb, exhaustion of administrative remedies before resorting to for appellant. an action for declaratory judgment. See Ragon v. Great American Indemnity Co., 224 Ark. 387, 273 S.W.2d 524 Pickens, McLarty & Watson, by: James A. McLarty, for (1954). appellee. [HN4] A basic rule of administrative procedure JUDGES: Robert H. Dudley, Justice. requires that the agency be given the opportunity to address a question before resorting to the courts. Truck OPINION BY: DUDLEY Transport, Inc. v. Miller Transporters, Inc., 285 Ark. 172, 685 S.W.2d 798 (1985). Furthermore, [HN5] the OPINION procedure of the agency before us provides for further administrative review of the agency's decision. [*398] [**841] The Arkansas State Health S.H.P.D.A. Rule 11(13). By filing the declaratory Planning and Development Agency granted a certificate judgment action, the appellant circumvented the [***4] of need to appellant, Rehab Hospital Services established agency appeals procedure. Under most Corporation, to construct a hospital in Jonesboro. circumstances we would dismiss the appeal without Frances Flener, the Executive Director of appellee, reaching the [***6] merits of the case. However, we Delta-Hills Health Systems Agency, the regional health choose to decide the case on its merits because it involves planning agency for the Jonesboro area, filed a motion for the interpretation of the Freedom of Information Act, a reconsideration after conducting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the United States District Court
    Case 1:12-cv-00069-JB-KBM Document 135 Filed 11/18/14 Page 1 of 106 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO JARITA MESA LIVESTOCK GRAZING ASSOCIATION; ALAMOSA LIVESTOCK GRAZING ASSOCIATION; SEBEDEO CHACON; THOMAS GRIEGO; DONALD GRIEGO; MICHAEL PENA; JUAN GIRON; JOE GURULE, JR.; FERNANDO GURULE; DIEGO JARAMILLO; LORENZO JARAMILLO; GABRIEL ALDAZ; ARTURO RODARTE; JEFFREY CHACON; GLORIA VALDEZ; JERRY VASQUEZ; CARLOS ORTEGA; LEON ORTEGA; HORACIO MARTINEZ; RONALD MARTINEZ; STEVE CHAVEZ; VANGIE CHAVEZ; ALFONSO CHACON; DANIEL RAEL; JOHN VALDEZ and BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF RIO ARRIBA, Plaintiffs, vs. No. CIV 12-0069 JB/KBM UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE and DIANA TRUJILLO, in her official and individual capacities, Defendants. Case 1:12-cv-00069-JB-KBM Document 135 Filed 11/18/14 Page 2 of 106 AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION1 THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Federal Defendants‟ Motion to Dismiss Count 1 for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies, filed February 18, 2013 (Doc. 55)(“MTD”). The Court held a hearing on July 26, 2013. The primary issue is whether the Court should dismiss the Plaintiffs‟ retaliation claim under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Because the Plaintiffs never argued their First Amendment retaliation claim before Defendant United States Forest Service in the administrative proceedings, because a claim is not exempt from the administrative-exhaustion requirement merely because it is constitutional in nature, and because the administrative-exhaustion requirement is mandatory and thus not subject to judicial waiver, the Court will dismiss without prejudice the First Amendment retaliation claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 7 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhaustion of State Remedies Before Bringing Federal Habeas Corpus: a Reappraisal of U.S. Code Section
    Nebraska Law Review Volume 43 | Issue 1 Article 7 1963 Exhaustion of State Remedies before Bringing Federal Habeas Corpus: A Reappraisal of U.S. Code Section Merritt aJ mes University of Nebraska College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr Recommended Citation Merritt aJ mes, Exhaustion of State Remedies before Bringing Federal Habeas Corpus: A Reappraisal of U.S. Code Section, 43 Neb. L. Rev. 120 (1964) Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol43/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW VOL. 43, NO. 1 EXHAUSTION OF STATE REMEDIES BEFORE BRINGING FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS: A REAPPRAISAL OF U.S. CODE SECTION 2254 I. INTRODUCTION There are many instances in which a state's prisoner, after being denied his liberty for years, has subsequently, upon issuance of federal writ of habeas corpus, either been proven innocent or adjudged entitled to a new trial upon grounds that he was denied some constitutional right during the process of his state court trial.' In some of these cases it has been clear from the very beginning that if the allegations of the writ were proven, the de- tention was unconstitutional. Yet the prisoner is still forced to endure years of confinement while exhausting state remedies before 2 federal habeas corpus is available to him.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Access to Constitutional Justice
    Strasbourg, 27 January 2011 CDL-AD(2010)039rev. Study N° 538 / 2009 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) STUDY ON INDIVIDUAL ACCESS TO CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 85th Plenary Session (Venice, 17-18 December 2010) on the basis of comments by Mr Gagik HARUTYUNYAN (Member, Armenia) Ms Angelika NUSSBERGER (Substitute Member, Germany) Mr Peter PACZOLAY (Member, Hungary) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. http://www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2010)039 - 2 - Table of contents INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................6 GENERAL REMARKS....................................................................................................6 I. ACCESS TO CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW ...............................................................15 I.1. TYPES OF ACCESS .................................................................................................17 I.1.1. Indirect access...................................................................................................17 I.1.2. Direct access.....................................................................................................20 I.2. THE ACTS UNDER REVIEW ......................................................................................28 I.3. PROTECTED RIGHTS ..............................................................................................29 PARTIAL CONCLUSIONS OF CHAPTER
    [Show full text]
  • Fail to Comment at Your Own Risk: Does Issue Exhaustion Have a Place in Judicial Review of Rules?
    Fail to Comment at Your Own Risk: Does Issue Exhaustion Have a Place in Judicial Review of Rules? Jeffrey S. Lubbers* The requirement that parties seeking judicial review of agency action first “exhaust” their administrative remedies initially developed as a prudential judicial construct1 and now is also sometimes reflected in statutes.2 The classic version of the exhaustion requirement generally requires a party to go through all the stages of an administrative adjudication before going to court. This ensures that the agency action being challenged is the final agency position and that the agency has had the opportunity to bring its expertise to bear and to correct any errors it may have made at an earlier stage. It also allows for the resolution of disputes before they come to court, thus avoiding potentially unnecessary additions to court dockets. I will refer to this as “remedy exhaustion.” The orthodox application of the remedy exhaustion requirement involves cases where the petitioner for judicial review has eschewed available administrative appeal opportunities. In some cases, a court’s refusal to accept review will simply clear the way for the further administrative proceedings to take place;3 but in other situations, the foreclosure of judicial relief occurs after “the opportunity to invoke the relevant administrative processes had passed.”4 * Professor of Practice in Administrative Law, Washington College of Law, American University; Research Director of the Administrative Conference of the United States (“ACUS”) from 1982–1995, Special Counsel to ACUS 2011– present, J.D., University of Chicago. I thank my research assistant Cooper Spinelli (Class of 2014) and ACUS staff (Stephanie Tatham, Connie Vogelmann, and Seth Nadler), for very helpful research assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Study on Individual Access to Constitutional Justice
    Strasbourg, 8 December 2010 CDL(2010)134* Study N° 538 / 2009 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) DRAFT STUDY ON INDIVIDUAL ACCESS TO CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE on the basis of comments by Mr Gaguik HARUTYUNYAN (Member, Armenia) Ms Angelika NUSSBERGER (Substitute Member, Germany) Mr Peter PACZOLAY (Member, Hungary) *This document has been classified restricted on the date of issue. Unless the Venice Commission decides otherwise, it will be declassified a year after its issue according to the rules set up in Resolution CM/Res(2001)6 on access to Council of Europe documents. This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. http://www.venice.coe.int CDL(2010)134 - 2 - Table of contents INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................6 GENERAL REMARKS......................................................................................................6 I. ACCESS TO CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW ................................................................15 I.1. TYPES OF ACCESS...................................................................................................16 I.1.1. Indirect access ....................................................................................................16 I.1.2. Direct access.......................................................................................................20 I.2. THE ACTS UNDER REVIEW ........................................................................................27
    [Show full text]
  • In the Court of Appeals of the State of Mississippi No. 2016
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2016-SA-00112-COA MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC APPELLANTS SAFETY AND ALBERT SANTA CRUZ, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY v. STACY SMITH, GREG NESTER, AND APPELLEES KRISTOPHER WINGERT DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/06/2016 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WILLIAM A. GOWAN JR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: PETER W. CLEVELAND WILSON DOUGLAS MINOR ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES: DENNIS L. HORN SHIRLEY PAYNE NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: GRANTED THE APPELLEES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND OTHER RELIEF DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 08/01/2017 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED: EN BANC. CARLTON, J., FOR THE COURT: ¶1. Forensic scientists Stacy Smith, Greg Nester, and Kristopher Wingert (collectively, the Appellees), after proceeding through four levels of administrative review for grievances related to their transfer from the Mississippi Crime Laboratory (Crime Lab) to the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation (MBI) and the subsequent loss of their Crime Lab “position identification numbers” (PINs), filed a petition for a writ of mandamus on July 9, 2013, in the Hinds County Circuit Court, First Judicial District. The Mississippi Department of Public Safety (MDPS) failed to notify the Appellees, who were state civil-service employees, about the loss of their Crime Lab PINs until well after the event occurred. In their mandamus petition, the Appellees requested the following relief: (1) placement in the forensic[-]scientist step appropriate with their experience and performance, (2) all back pay due along with all fringe benefits, including contributions to the Mississippi State Retirement System [(PERS)], (3) on[-] call pay, (4) prospective placement in steps earned by experience, and (5) placement in supervisory positions if such become available.
    [Show full text]
  • RULES Supreme Court of the United States
    RULES OF THE Supreme Court of the United States ADOPTED APRIL 18, 2019 EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 1 First Street, N. E. Washington, DC 20543 Clerk of the Court ............................... (202) 479-3011 Reporter of Decisions.......................... (202) 479-3390 Marshal of the Court........................... (202) 479-3333 Librarian................................................ (202) 479-3175 Telephone Operator ............................. (202) 479-3000 Visit the U.S. Supreme Court Website http://www.supremecourt.gov Mailing Address of the Solicitor General of the United States (see Rule 29.4) Room 5616 Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, DC 20530-0001 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. THE COURT Page Rule 1. Clerk ................................................................................................ 1 Rule 2. Library ............................................................................................ 1 Rule 3. Term ................................................................................................ 1 Rule 4. Sessions and Quorum ................................................................... 2 PART II. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS Rule 5. Admission to the Bar.................................................................... 2 Rule 6. Argument Pro Hac Vice.............................................................. 3 Rule 7. Prohibition Against Practice ...................................................... 4 Rule 8. Disbarment and Disciplinary
    [Show full text]
  • Exhaustion of Remedies in a Private Hospital
    NOTES EIDELSON V RCHER EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES IN A PRIVATE HOSPITAL I. INTRODUCTION In Eidelson v. Archer,' the Alaska Supreme Court for the first time applied the exhaustion of remedies doctrine to a private hospi- tal proceeding. The unanimous court 2 did not decide whether the hospital was purely private or quasi-public. 3 It nevertheless held that before challenging the revocation of hospital staff privileges in the courts, a physician must exhaust the hospital's internal review procedures. In 1977, the executive committee of the privately owned Alaska Hospital and Medical Center summarily suspended Dr. Gary Archer's staff privileges while investigating allegations of his miscon- duct.4 Later, he was formally notified of his suspension, the reasons for it, and his right to a hearing under the hospital's bylaws.5 Instead of requesting such a hearing, Archer filed a motion in superior court against the hospital alleging wrongful removal, intentional interfer- ence with contract, and defamation. Before trial the complaint was amended to substitute for the initial charges a single charge of wrongful use of the hospital's bylaws.6 The jury returned a verdict Copyright © 1984 by Alaska Law Review 1. 645 P.2d 171 (Alaska 1982). On remand the case was dismissed and attor- ney's fees were awarded. The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed this disposition of the case in an unpublished memorandum opinion. Archer v. Eidelson, No. 132 (Aug. 31, 1983) (disposition reported in ALASKA SUP. CT. MONTHLY ACTIVITY REP. (Aug. 1983)). 2. Justice Connor did not participate. 3. 645 P.2d at 175-76 n.13.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Issue Exhaustion Have a Place in Judicial Review of Rules?
    FAIL TO COMMENT AT YOUR OWN RISK: DOES ISSUE EXHAUSTION HAVE A PLACE IN JUDICIAL REVIEW OF RULES? JEFFREY S. LUBBERS∗ TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................... 110 I. Development of the Issue Exhaustion Doctrine: It Began with a Statutory Provision Applying to Agency Adjudications—L.A. Tucker Truck Lines ........................................................................................ 112 II. Application of Issue Exhaustion in a Ratemaking Case—Colorado Interstate ............................................................................................ 119 III. Rejection of Issue Exhaustion in a “Non-Adversary” Adjudication—Sims v. Apfel .............................................................. 120 IV. Exhaustion in Rulemaking .................................................................. 122 V. The Relevance of Darby v. Cisneros ......................................................... 124 VI. The Early Application of Issue Exhaustion in Rulemaking Cases by the D.C. Circuit .................................................................................... 126 VI. A Contemporaneous Development—Issue Exhaustion in NEPA Cases.. .................................................................................. 128 VII. General Issue Exhaustion Statutes and Judicially Developed Exceptions—the WATCH Case ...................................................... 131 VIII. The Increasing Application to Rulemaking Cases ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT of CALIFORNIA 10 11 GEORGE SOULIOTES, ) 1:06-Cv-00667 AWI MJS HC ) 12 Petitioner, ) ) ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER to 13 V
    Case 1:06-cv-00667-AWI-MJS Document 156 Filed 08/02/12 Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GEORGE SOULIOTES, ) 1:06-cv-00667 AWI MJS HC ) 12 Petitioner, ) ) ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO 13 v. ) SHOW CAUSE (Doc. 152) ) 14 ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Warden, ) ORDER REQUIRING RESPONDENT TO ) FILE AN ANSWER 15 Respondent. ) ) THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE 16 ________________________________) 17 18 19 I. INTRODUCTION 20 The interplay of the doctrines of exhaustion of state remedies and procedural default 21 with respect to federal habeas corpus results in a paradox.1 By not exhausting state remedies, 22 a claim may nonetheless be considered exhausted by the failure to do so. As described 23 below, the Court discharges the order to show cause - not because Petitioner has properly 24 exhausted his claims in state court - but, by failing to present them in state court, and no 25 longer being able to return to do so, the claims are considered technically exhausted and are 26 27 1 In the words of Nobel Prize winning physicist Niels Bohr: “How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress.” 28 U.S. District Court E. D. California -1- Case 1:06-cv-00667-AWI-MJS Document 156 Filed 08/02/12 Page 2 of 11 1 instead subject to the requirements of procedural default. While the claims may still be barred 2 based on procedural default, the amended petition is not considered a mixed petition of 3 exhausted and unexhausted claims subject to dismissal.
    [Show full text]
  • Requiring Exhaustion: an International Law Perspective of the Alien Tort Claims Act in Sarei V
    Golden Gate University Law Review Volume 38 Article 5 Issue 3 Ninth Circuit Survey January 2008 Requiring Exhaustion: An International Law Perspective of the Alien Tort Claims Act in Sarei v. Rio Tinto Steffanie Bevington Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev Part of the International Trade Law Commons Recommended Citation Steffanie Bevington, Requiring Exhaustion: An International Law Perspective of the Alien Tort Claims Act in Sarei v. Rio Tinto, 38 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. (2008). http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev/vol38/iss3/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Golden Gate University Law Review by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Bevington: Exhaustion of Local Remedies NOTE REQUIRING EXHAUSTION: AN INTERNATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE OF THE ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT IN SAREI V. RIO TINTO INTRODUCTION Surrounded by dense rain forest and tropical stillness lies one of the world's largest man-made holes in the ground. When the ore is completely extracted, the pit will measure nearly 8,000 feet across and around 1,200 feet deep. It would take two Golden Gate Bridges to span the hole, and if the Empire State Building were set at the bottom, only the antenna on top would rise above the rim of the mine.) The Panguna Mine, described above by environmentalist Jean Michael Cousteau as it appeared in 1988, is located in Papua New Guinea ("PNG,,).2 The mine was built in the village of Panguna on Bougainville, an island province of PNG, in the 1960s by Rio Tinto PLC ("Rio Tinto,,).3 The mine began operating in 1972.4 Within ten years of commencing operations, it was one of the largest copper mines in the I Sarei v.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Introduction to the Administrative Process II. Due Process
    Administrative Law Outline -- Levin I. Introduction to the Administrative Process A. Overview of Administrative Law 1. Administrative law comes from four main sources – the Constitution, APA (general and comprehensive), particular agency enabling acts (specific), and administrative common law 2. Judicial review – mechanism for enforcing procedural and substantive constraints on agency action. 3. Enforcement – regulatory norms are enforceable by agencies and sometimes by private parties affected by violations of regulatory norms. B. Function of Administrative Agencies 1. Distribution of government benefits, granting of licenses and permits, policy making in a wide variety of regulated agencies. 2. Benefits of agency regulation (versus cts/common law) a. more specialized knowledge b. more efficient c. broader range of available tools d. agency can adopt rules rather than be stuck w/ controversy of parties 3. drawbacks to agency a. more political 4. types of admin agencies a. executive agencies – heads of agencies making up the President’s cabinet, serve at President’s will/pleasure. b. independent agencies – insulated from Pres control, headed by multi-member group rather than single agency head, members w/ fixed staggered terms, can only be removed for cause II. Due Process A. Introduction 1. Fifth Amendment – no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property w/o due process of law. a. applies to states via 14th Amendment b. same case law under 5th and 14th Amendments 2. Substantive due process versus procedural due process a. substantive due process – limits on what government can regulate b. procedural due process – procedures by which government may affect individual’s rights B. Interests protected by due process 1.
    [Show full text]