Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
In re Leverich
AFD-70/81303 (Wis. Dep’t of Health & Social Servs. Sept. 27, 1995). ; Clearinghouse Number: 51151
Description
Agency Equitably Estopped from Recouping Overpayment Caused by Agency’s Inaccurate Verification of Recipient’s Life Insurance Policy Cash Value
Abstract
The court has held that respondent Wisconsin Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS) is equitably estopped from recovering an
AFDC overpayment from petitioner, a divorced mother of two minor
children. The divorce decree ordered petitioner’s former
husband to maintain petitioner’s life insurance policy for
the children’s benefit. When petitioner applied for AFDC, she
gave the county agency a copy of the life insurance policy, which
showed a $0 cash surrender value, verified at subsequent
eligibility reviews by her caseworkers. Four years later, her
caseworker requested new verification of the policy’s value,
which now was $1,319, exceeding the $1,000 asset limit. DHSS found
that petitioner had been overpaid $2,395 in benefits and sought
recoupment. The court held that DHSS was equitably estopped from
recouping because DHSS caseworkers had verified that the insurance
policy had no cash value at six periodic eligibility reviews from
her application to when the policy’s actual cash value was
discovered; petitioner reasonably relied on the information from
the caseworkers; and a balance of the equities at stake weighed in
petitioner’s favor. Counsel notes that the court subsequently
awarded petitioner attorney fees.
