Legal Opinion
William Earl Bobo Jack Mitchell v. United States Department of Agriculture
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided May 5, 1995No. 94-3311PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILBURN, Circuit Judge.
Petitioners William Earl Bobo and Jack Mitchell seek review of the decision of the Secretary of Agriculture pursuant to the Horse Protection Act (“HPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1821, et seq., assessing civil penalties and prohibiting petitioners from showing or entering horses for a period of two years, based upon the finding that petitioners had on two previous occasions showed a Tennessee Walking Horse, Ultimate Beam, at a horse show while the horse was “sore.” On appeal, the issues are (1) whether “soreness” under the HPA can be determined based solely upon a horse’s reaction…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Stinson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- R.P. Carbone Construction Company v. The Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission Alexis M. Herman, United States Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- Reinhart v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Mountain States Contractors v. Thomas PerezCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
- Trimble v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- Bennett v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.