Abstract
In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery (Chenery I) the Supreme Court established the proposition that when an agency gives the wrong reason for a decision of policy or law, the reviewing court will send the case back for reconsideration, even though the court might have upheld the order if a different reason had been assigned. In this article Judge Friendly examines the scope that courts have attributed to Chenery, concludes that there are in fact three separate principles of review, and illuminates their applicability and utility as tools of judicial discretion.
Citation
Henry J. Friendly,
Chenery Revisited: Reflections on Reversal and Remand of Administrative Orders,
1969 Duke Law Journal
199-225
(1969)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol18/iss2/1