Alexander v. Polk
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
750 F.2d 250 (1984)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
Under the Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), participating states are given grants to provide supplemental foods to low-income children and pregnant women. Implementing WIC regulations required state agencies to control expenditures with budgeted amounts and local agencies to establish recipient eligibility at certification visits. If the WIC program reached maximum capacity, local agencies were to implement a priority system, removing recipients who were deemed no longer in need or if more deserving potential recipients were waiting for assistance. WIC regulations directed state agencies to establish a hearing procedure permitting terminated recipients to challenge a removal and to inform the recipients of the right to the hearing during the initial certification visit and at termination. After the WIC program exceeded the maximum caseload, the City of Philadelphia (defendant) initiated a priority system. Philadelphia orally informed recipients designated for termination (terminated recipients) (plaintiffs) of their removal from the program. Although the terminated recipients were informed of their right to a hearing at the first certification visit, the terminated recipients were not reminded of this right upon termination. Terminated recipients sued, arguing that Philadelphia violated applicable regulations. Philadelphia contended that because WIC eligibility is not a property interest, the terminated recipients did not suffer a compensable injury, and in any event, Philadelphia’s actions constituted substantial compliance with the regulatory requirements. The district court found in the terminated recipients’ favor. Philadelphia appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gibbons, J.)
Concurrence (Seitz, J.)
Dissent (Hunter, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.