Walton v. Hammons
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
192 F.3d 590 (1999)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
The Michigan Family Independence Administration (MFIA) implemented a rule providing for the termination of a household’s Family Independent Program (FIP) cash-assistance benefits if a household member failed, without good cause, to cooperate in establishing the paternity of a child for at least four consecutive months. Michigan also applied the rule to the food-stamp program. Ethan Walton (plaintiff) was the minor child of Antoinette Walton. Antoinette also had a daughter, Te’Asha Walton. Although Antoinette was able to establish paternity and child support for Ethan, she did not do so for Te’Asha. The MFIA notified Antoinette that her failure to establish Te’Asha’s paternity would result in termination of the entire family’s benefits. Ethan brought suit, arguing that the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) did not authorize Marva Hammons (defendant), the MFIA director, to terminate a household’s food-stamp benefits due to parents’ failure to cooperate in establishing paternity. The district court granted summary judgment for Walton. Hammons appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, 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.