79 F. Supp. 3d 712 - Barry v. Corrigan’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 5 U.S.C. § 706 · 7 U.S.C. § 2011 (Charitable Assistance and Food Bank Act of 1987) · 7 U.S.C. § 2014 · 7 U.S.C. § 2015
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Goldberg v. Kelly · Gault · Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The notices state the intended action— denial or reduction of benefits. For example, the May 16, 2013 notice sent to Barry provides, under the heading “Intended-Action,” a summary of benefits— in this instance, listing “Food Assistance Program.” The notice shows the relevant action as “closed” and states, “[y]our ongoing benefit has been can-celled but you will continue to receive benefits through the day before the period listed above.” The reason given for the action is simply “You or a member of your group is not eligible for assistance due to a criminal justice disqualification.” This fails to indicate whose conduct is at issue. -It also fails to indicate which of the five types of criminal justice disqualifications applied by [MDHHS] is being invoked. From at least 2012 to mid-2013, the notices referred to section 203 of the BEM, where five types of criminal justice disqualifications from public assistance benefits were listed. In June 2013, [MDHHS] placed the fugitive felon disqualification in its own section of the BEM (204). But the notices thereafter continue to use the general phrase “criminal justice disqualification.” Thus, a notice recipient must still be able to (1) determine that “BEM 204” refers to the Bridges Eligibility Manual, section 204, (2) determine that the relevant type of criminal justice disqualification can be found there, and (3) get access to the BEM. Even if a notice recipient locates a copy of the BEM and determines the type of disqualification”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a plaintiffs asserted injury arises from the government’s allegedly unlawful regulation (or lack of regulation) of someone else... causation and redressability ordinarily hinge on the response of the regulated (or regula-ble) third party to the government action or inaction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“• Food Assistance Program (FAP) • Family Independence Program (FIP) • State Disability Assistance Program (SDA) • Child Development and Care Program (CDC), and • Refugee Assistance Program (RAP)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.