Beucke

Beucke v. United States Department of Agriculture

Good Law
314 F. App'x 10
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 6, 2008Nos. 06-75358, 07-70033California1,030 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Donald Beucke petitions for review of the decisions of the Secretary of Agriculture affirming the administrative law judge’s decision that he was “responsibly connected” to Garden Fresh Produce and to Bayside Produce. The Secretary had found that those companies had violated 7 U.S.C. § 499b(4), a provision of the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act of 1930 (“PACA”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 499a-499s, by failing to pay produce suppliers. Beucke also alleges a series of procedural errors by the Secretary over the course of the administrative hearings.

We “ ‘review final decisions in PACA cases under the deferential standard of the [APA]. Under that standard, we must “uphold the Judicial Officer’s decision unless we find it to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, not in accordance with law, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” ’ ” Kleiman & Hochberg, Inc. v. Dep’t of Agrie., 497 F.3d 681, 686 (D.C.Cir.2007) (citations omitted). Agency factual findings are reviewed under the substantial evidence test. Citizens To Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 414 , 91 S.Ct. 814 , 28 L.Ed.2d 136 (1971). This review means that the record must support an agency…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.