43 C.F.R. §4.1374 - Burdens of proof
| Cite as | 43 C.F.R. §4.1374 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
Nat'l Mining Ass'n v. Office of Hearings, Case No. 1:04–cv–00128 BJR.
...was decided. In NMA v. DOI 2001, NMA challenged, among other things, the burden of proof allocations contained in two OHA regulations: 43 C.F.R. §§ 4.1374 and 4.1384. Neither of these regulations is being challenged by NMA in the instant case. The court sees no reason to opine about whether......
-
Nat'l Mining Assoc. v. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 96-5274
...Department's Office of Hearing and Appeals (OHA) were not changed by the new rulemaking, NMA's original challenge to those rules--43 C.F.R. 4.1374 and 4.1384--presents a live controversy. Both rules place the "burden of persuasion" on those challenging the validity of a decision to rescind ......
-
Nat'l MINING Ass'n v. OFFICE of HEARINGS, CASE NO. 1:04-cv-00128 BJR
...In NMA v. DOI 2001, NMA Page 13challenged, among other things, the burden of proof allocations contained in two OHA regulations: 43 C.F.R. §§4.1374 and 4.1384. Neither of these regulations is being challenged by NMA in the instant case. The court sees no reason to opine about whether OHA's ......
-
National Min. Ass'n v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, s. 97-5202
...Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 556(d). The challenged burden framework is set out not in the IFR but in OSM's procedural rules, see 43 C.F.R. §§ 4.1374(b), 4.1384(b), which are subject to appeal in a separate pending action. See supra note 11 We recognize that the Fourth Circuit has held that se......