Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
West v. Bowen
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided June 30, 1989No. 88-1475Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMansmann, Circuit Judge
I concur fully in the opinion and judgment of the court with regard to the Class B plaintiffs. I respectfully dissent from the majority’s treatment of the Class A plaintiffs on numerous grounds.
The grant of summary judgment concerning West’s Class A claims should be reversed because the interpretation by the Secretary, United States Department of Agriculture (“the Secretary”), of the “receives” language in the Food Stamp Act (“FSA”) is due little deference due to its sharply inconsistent interpretation and is contrary to the intent and purpose of Congress in providing food stamps to disabled…
2Cases cited90 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Bowen v. YuckertSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.