Case ID: f-appx_111/html/0766-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jack REEVES; Jo Ann Reeves, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Roger KLURFELD, Director, United States Department of Agriculture, National Appeals Division, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 04-10653.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided Nov. 4, 2004.
    Keith Cameron Thompson, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
    
      Ann Cruce Roberts, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

We affirm the decision of the district court for the following reasons:

1. The FSA’s determination that the Reeves did not show good faith was not arbitrary or capricious and is supported by the FSA’s reasonable interpretation of its regulations. See Martin v. OSHA, 499 U.S. 144, 150, 111 S.Ct. 1171, 113 L.Ed.2d 117 (1991); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43, 103 S.Ct. 2856, 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983).
2. The agency’s interpretation that 7 C.F.R. § 1924.56 requires the FSA to prepare an independent Farm and Home Plan only where the parties disagree as to the business plan proposed therein is reasonable and thus entitled to deference. Martin, 499 U.S. at 150, 111 S.Ct. 1171.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.