About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

42 UCLA L. Rev. 1157 (1994-1995)
The Scope of Judicial Review of Decisions of California Adminsitrative Agencies

handle is hein.journals/uclalr42 and id is 1171 raw text is: THE SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DECISIONS OF CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES Michael Asimow* INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1159 I. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AoENCY FACT FINDINGS IN FORMAL ADJUDICATION 1161 A. Introduction . .......................................... 1161 B. California's Independent Judgment Test ...................... 1164 1. History of Independent Judgment Test-Standard Oil Decision and Its Progeny .............................. 1164 2. The Enactment of Section 1094.5 ....................... 1166 3. Judicial Process Under the Independent Judgment Test ........ 1167 4. Removal of the Constitutional Basis for the Independent Judgment Test . ..................................... 1169 5. Policy Rationale for Independent Judgment ................ 1170 6. Vested Fundamental Rights Protected by the Independent Judgment Test . ..................................... 1171 C. Recommendations ....................................... 1176 1. Protection of Individual Rights Under the Substantial Evidence Test ....................................... 1177 2. Historic Arguments .................................. 1180 3. Arguments for Rejecting the Independent Judgment Test ...... 1181 a. Accuracy Concerns ................................ 1181 (1) Independent Judgment Generates Inaccurate Results ...... 1181 (2) Independent Judgment Is Ineffective to Counteract Institutional Bias .............................. 1183 b. Efficiency Arguments ............................... 1184 c. Acceptability to Regulated Persons and to the Public ....... 1186 4. Political Theory and Separation of Powers ................. 1189 * Professor of Law, UCLA Law School. The author is a consultant to the California Law Revision Commission in its project to adopt a new California Administrative Procedure Act that would refashion California administrative adjudication and judicial review. The Commission has not completed its work, and all of the conclusions in this article are mine alone, not those of the staff or members of the Commission. I am grateful for the assistance provided by Daniel Asimow, Karl Engeman, William Funk, Ronald Levin, Gregory Ogden, Daniel Siegel, Gary Schwartz, and Robert Sullivan, and by faculty workshops at UCLA, Duke, and William and Mary Law Schools. Special thanks go to my research assistant Diana Ponce-Gomez for her dedicated assistance. I also wish to acknowledge the wise counsel I received from the members of the Law Revision Commission and the unflagging efforts of the Commission's staff, particularly Nat Sterling and Bob Murphy. Of course, responsibility for any errors is mine. 1157

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most