James V. Hurson Associates, Inc. v. Glickman
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
229 F.3d 277 (2000)

- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (defendant) was responsible for reviewing the labels that commercial food producers sought to attach to their products. A commercial food producer was permitted to submit a proposed label to the USDA in a number of ways: by mail, by personal visit, or by hiring courier/expediter firms to meet directly with the USDA. This last method was known as “face-to-face.” Without engaging in notice-and-comment rulemaking, the USDA later enacted a rule that eliminated the face-to-face option. Subsequently, James V. Hurson Associates, Inc. (Hurson) (plaintiff), a courier/expediter firm, brought suit against the USDA, contending that the USDA violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by failing to follow notice-and-comment requirements. The district court ruled in favor of the USDA on the notice-and-comment claim. Hurson appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sentelle, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 827,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 992 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.