Law360, New York ( December 1, 2014, 6:04 PM EST) -- On Dec. 1, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, addressing the question whether an agency can revise a definitive interpretation of its own regulation without subjecting the revised interpretation to the Administrative Procedure Act's notice-and-comment rule-making procedures. At issue — and of great interest to the broader regulated community and followers of the Supreme Court's administrative law jurisprudence — is an almost-20-year-old D.C. Circuit precedent that discourages agency flip-flopping by requiring changes to interpretations of rules that are integral to the public's understanding of those rules to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking....
Law360 is on it, so you are, too.
A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.
A Law360 subscription includes features such as
- Daily newsletters
- Expert analysis
- Mobile app
- Advanced search
- Judge information
- Real-time alerts
- 450K+ searchable archived articles
And more!
Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.