Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman

204 F.3d 229 (2000)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

204 F.3d 229 (2000)

Facts

In 1985, Congress enacted the Improved Standards for Laboratory Animals Act (laboratory act). The laboratory act authorized the Department of Agriculture (department) to promulgate regulations on the minimum requirements that primate-research facilities must satisfy to ensure a physical environment that promotes social well-being. The department began the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) notice-and-comment rulemaking process. In 1991, the department promulgated the final regulation, which consisted of five broad and general standards. Otherwise, the department gave deference to the facilities’ onsite veterinarians to determine how best to promote primate social well-being on the ground that providing a specific and strict set of standards for all facilities, many of which had different primate types, would prove too challenging. The standards did require that each facility establish a performance plan detailing a social-well-being approach. Marc Jurnove (plaintiff) sued Secretary of Agriculture Daniel R. Glickman (defendant) for violating the laboratory act and APA. Jurnove argued that Glickman had violated the laboratory act because the standards promulgated were too broad and not in compliance with the minimum-requirements language. Jurnove argued that Glickman had violated the APA because he ignored comments that primates should be grouped together to promote primate well-being. Glickman argued that the evidence gathered from the notice-and-comment rulemaking process was conflicting on whether the regulations should require facilities to group the primates together. The district court returned a verdict for Jurnove. The matter was appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Williams, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership