Termini v. Califano’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382A (§ 1612 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 1631 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Dandridge v. Williams · Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. · King v. Smith · Lewis v. Martin
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . If a state chooses to provide such supplement, it may enter into an agreement with the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) whereby HEW administers the state’s supplementary payment program. Id. As a condition of such administration, however, the state supplementation plan must conform to federal regulations. Id. The regulations pertinent to state supplementary payments provide two categories of recipients — ‘Individuals’ and ‘Couples’ — and allow each state to provide for up to five variations in payment level based upon the recipient’s ‘living arrangement’. The regulations also provide, however, that any such differences in payment levels ‘must be based on rational distinctions between both the types of living arrangements and the costs of those arrangements.’ 20 C.F.R. § 416 .-2030(b). New York State has entered into an Agreement with the Secretary of HEW pursuant to which HEW administers the State’s supplemental SSI payments, and pursuant to such Agreement and the federal regulations, the State has elected to provide for five different payment levels based on living arrangements. Three of those categories are group living situations which are not relevant to this action. The other two are designated ‘Living Alone’ and ‘Living with Others’. N.Y.Soc.Serv.L. § 209(3)(a), (b) (McKinney’s 1976). ‘Living Alone’ is defined as ‘living in a private household composed of one eligible individual or one eligible couple'; ‘Living with Others' is de”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gilchrist v. Harris
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.