Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 903 F.3d 32 (2018)

Citation
Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 903 F.3d 32 (2018)
Parent Document
Theodore Hayes v. Philip Harvey, 903 F.3d 32 (2018)
Effective Date
2018-08-31

Other Sections in This Document (144)

Full Text

653 chars
32
“[t]he good cause concept should be flexible,” and that it
“should remain open to case by case determination by the
courts.” 60 Fed. Reg. 34,660, 34,673 (July 3, 1995) (quoting
49 Fed. Reg. 12,215, 12,233 (Mar. 29, 1984)). The agency
therefore stressed that its rule provides “key ‘examples’ of
cases that may be good cause, but explicitly states that ‘other
good cause’ is not limited to the listed examples.” Id.
(emphasis added).        In other words, the good cause
determination is an inevitably fact-intensive inquiry, as “a
comprehensive regulatory definition . . . is neither possible
[n]or desirable.” Id. (quoting 49 Fed. Reg. at 12,233).