Legal Opinion
Rosas v. Montgomery
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 31, 1970No. Civ. 27235PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RATTIGAN, J.
Among several statutory standards of eligibility which a person must meet in order to qualify for public assistance (“ATD”) under California’s “Aid to the Needy Disabled” program (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 13500 et seq. 1 ), he must be disabled by a physical or mental “impairment.” We hold on this appeal that an applicant afflicted with alcoholism cannot be disqualified upon the sole basis of an administrative regulation adopted by the Director of the Department of Social Welfare and purporting to exclude alcoholism as a qualifying “impairment.”
In June 1967, appellant Alex F.…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Powell v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Morris v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Whitcomb Hotel, Inc. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Comer Blocker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1961
- Wulzen v. Bd. of Supervisors of City & Cty of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Clean Air Constituency v. California State Air Resources BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Mooney v. PickettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Woods v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Huntoon v. Iowa Department of Job ServicesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- Orville J. Griffis, Jr. v. Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.