R. Gordon Darby, et al. v. Henry G. Cisneros, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, et al. (509 U.S. 137)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 21, 1993 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 509 U.S. 137 · 113 S. Ct. 2539
- Decided
- June 21, 1993
- Term
- October Term 1992
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Blackmun
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Blackmun delivered the opinion of the Court. This case presents the question whether federal courts have the authority to require that a plaintiff exhaust available administrative remedies before seeking judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U. S. C. § 701 et seq., where neither the statute nor agency rules specifically mandate exhaustion as a prerequisite to judicial re- ' view. At issue is the relationship between the judicially created doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and the statutory requirements of § 10(c) of the APA. I Petitioner R. Gordon Darby is a self-employed South Carolina real estate developer who specializes in the development and management of multifamily rental projects. In the early 1980’s, he began working with Lonnie Garvin, Jr., a mortgage banker, who had developed a plan to enable multifamily developers to obtain single-family mortgage insurance from respondent Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Respondent Secretary of HUD (Secretary) is authorized to provide single-family mortgage insurance under § 203(b) of the National Housing Act, 48 Stat. 1249, as amended, 12 U. S. C. § 1709(b). Although HUD also provides mortgage insurance for multifamily projects under § 207 of the National Housing Act, 12 U. S. C. § 1713, the greater degree of oversight and control over such projects makes it less…
Excerpt of a 32,933-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.