Edward F. Murphy - Page 18

                                       - 18 -                                         
          determination is abuse of discretion and the appropriate scope of           
          review, pursuant to the record rule, is the hearing record.  The            
          record rule is the general rule of administrative law that a                
          court can engage in judicial review of an agency action only on             
          the basis of the record amassed by the agency.  2 Pierce,                   
          Administrative Law, sec. 11.6, at 822 (4th ed. 2002); see United            
          States v. Carlo Bianchi & Co., 373 U.S. 709, 714 (1963).                    
          Respondent recognizes that there are exceptions to the general              
          rule; e.g., “where the administrative record fails to disclose              
          the factors considered by the agency”,3 “where necessary for                
          background information”,4 and “where the agency failed to                   
          consider all relevant factors”.5   Nevertheless, respondent                 
          argues that none of those exceptions exist here.                            
               Respondent also recognizes that, recently, in Robinette v.             
          Commissioner, 123 T.C. 85, 101 (2004), we held that, in reviewing           
          for an abuse of discretion under section 6330(d), we are not                
          limited to the administrative record.  In Robinette, we were                
          asked to review an Appeals officer’s determination that the                 


               3  Respondent cites Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc.            
          v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 420 (1971), overruled on unrelated                  
          grounds by Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99, 105 (1977).                    
               4  Respondent cites Thompson v. U.S. Dept. of Labor, 885               
          F.2d 551, 555 (9th Cir. 1989).                                              
               5  Respondent cites Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Lorion, 470              
          U.S. 729, 744 (1985); accord Franklin Sav. Association v.                   
          Director, 934 F.2d 1127, 1137-1138 (10th Cir. 1991).                        





Page:  Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011