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
V.R. v. Ohl
No. 3:98-CV-1176 (S.D. W.Va. Feb. 3, 1999). ; Clearinghouse Number: 52215
Description
Supplemental Security Income Paid to Children May Not Be Counted as Household Income for Determining Eligibility for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
Abstract
The district court preliminarily enjoined West Virginia’s
welfare agency from counting Supplemental Security Income (SSI) to
children as income available to the family when determining the
family’s eligibility for Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF). Plaintiffs are single custodial parents of
children who receive SSI benefits for their disabilities.
Plaintiffs either applied for or asked about receiving TANF but
were told by defendant state welfare agency that they were
ineligible because they received disability benefits.
Defendant’s policy apparently was to count SSI when it
determined whether a household was eligible for TANF. The court
concluded that the public interest favored parents because agency
was interfering with the statutory goals of SSI and TANF to help
sustain low-income persons and to allow them to pursue a reasonable
quality of life. The court reasoned that, although Congress did not
keep the Aid for Families with Dependent Children statutory
provision barring SSI benefits from being counted as income when
Congress enacted the federal welfare law creating TANF, the
provision’s absence did not mean that Congress gave states
the option to count SSI for children’s disability as
household income. The court cited the SSI statute and that
program’s purposes, which clearly provide that a
representative payee (the parent) must use SSI for the
beneficiary’s benefit. The court, however, left undecided the
issue of what to do when the SSI beneficiary was the parent and not
the child.
Additional Information
Files
- Complaint
- Answer
- Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction or in the alternative for summary judgment
- Memorandum in support of plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction or in the alternative summary judgment
- Order of court
- Defendant's response and memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction or in the alternative summary judgment
- Motion to dismiss
- Memorandum in support of defendant's motion to dismiss
- Plaintiffs' response to defendant's motion to dismiss and plaintiffs' reply to defendant's response to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction
- Reply to plaintiffs' response to defendant's motion to dismiss
- Plaintiffs' motion to extend time for reply to defendant's response and memorandum in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction or in the alternative summary judgment
- Order
- Plaintiffs' supplemental memo regarding adults with representative payees
- Supplemental reply to plaintiffs' response to defendant's motion to dismiss and plaintiffs' reply to defendant's response to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction
- Preliminary injunction order
- Motion for clarification of preliminary injunction order
- Order
