Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
E376519
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court administrative law case that clarified the "arbitrary and capricious" standard for judicial review of agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. canonical | 1 |
| Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm | 1 |
| State Farm case | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T3649935 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. Context triple: [Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, relatedCase, Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.]
-
A.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is a landmark 1916 New York Court of Appeals case that expanded manufacturers’ liability in negligence to consumers, even without privity of contract.
-
B.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
C.
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the conflict between federal procedural rules and state laws limiting class actions in federal diversity jurisdiction.
-
D.
Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit
The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
-
E.
American Insurance Assn. v. Garamendi
American Insurance Assn. v. Garamendi is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a California law requiring disclosure of Holocaust-era insurance policies was preempted by the federal government's foreign affairs power.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. Target entity description: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court administrative law case that clarified the "arbitrary and capricious" standard for judicial review of agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
A.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is a landmark 1916 New York Court of Appeals case that expanded manufacturers’ liability in negligence to consumers, even without privity of contract.
-
B.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
C.
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the conflict between federal procedural rules and state laws limiting class actions in federal diversity jurisdiction.
-
D.
Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit
The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
-
E.
American Insurance Assn. v. Garamendi
American Insurance Assn. v. Garamendi is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a California law requiring disclosure of Holocaust-era insurance policies was preempted by the federal government's foreign affairs power.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
administrative law case ⓘ landmark case ⓘ |
| agencyInvolved | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ⓘ |
| alsoKnownAs |
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
ⓘ
surface form:
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. ⓘ
surface form:
State Farm case
|
| areaOfLaw |
administrative law
ⓘ
motor vehicle safety regulation ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court
ⓘ
United States administrative case law ⓘ |
| citation | 463 U.S. 29 ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1983-06-24 ⓘ |
| holding |
Agency rescission of a rule is subject to the same arbitrary and capricious standard of review as agency adoption of a rule
ⓘ
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s rescission of the passive restraint requirement was arbitrary and capricious ⓘ |
| influenced | modern doctrine on agency policy reversals ⓘ |
| issue |
Scope of judicial review of agency rule rescissions under the APA
ⓘ
Whether NHTSA adequately explained its rescission of a passive restraint safety standard ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| languageOfRecord | English ⓘ |
| legalProvisionInterpreted |
5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A)
ⓘ
Administrative Procedure Act ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Byron R. White
|
| petitioner | Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the United States, Inc. ⓘ |
| principleEstablished |
Agencies must consider important aspects of the problem when making or rescinding rules
ⓘ
Agencies must examine relevant data and articulate a satisfactory explanation for their actions ⓘ Agencies must provide a reasoned analysis when changing or rescinding rules ⓘ Courts must set aside agency action that is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law ⓘ Failure to consider reasonable alternatives can render agency action arbitrary and capricious ⓘ |
| remedy | NHTSA’s rescission of the passive restraint standard was vacated and remanded ⓘ |
| respondent |
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
ⓘ
State Farm Insurance ⓘ
surface form:
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
United States Department of Transportation ⓘ |
| standardClarified | arbitrary and capricious standard ⓘ |
| statuteInvolved |
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966
ⓘ
surface form:
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
|
| subsequentCitationBy |
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California
ⓘ
Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro ⓘ FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. ⓘ |
| termOfCourt | October Term 1982 ⓘ |
| topic |
airbags
ⓘ
automatic seat belts ⓘ passive restraint systems ⓘ |
| usedFor | defining hard-look review of agency action ⓘ |
| vote |
5-4 on remedy and scope of remand
ⓘ
9-0 on APA violation ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. Description of subject: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court administrative law case that clarified the "arbitrary and capricious" standard for judicial review of agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.