Legal Opinion

Marshall v. State Department of Human Services

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided February 19, 1997No. 96-349PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

HARRIS, Justice.

The trial court held that the law applicable in this case demands a harsh result. The remedy accorded to the State initially does seem excessive. To his considerable credit, the assistant attorney general, as appellate counsel, tendered a lesser remedy that we feel obliged to reject. We agree with the trial court that incorrect information on a public benefits application rendered all benefits subject to recoupment by the State.

The petitioner Tina Marshall received aid to dependent children (ADC) 1 benefits from the Iowa department of human services (the department) from July…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Weede v. Iowa Southern Utilities Co. of DelawareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
  2. Perley v. HeathSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
  3. State Ex Rel. Schlegel v. MunnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933
  4. Lori Johnston v. Iowa Department of Human Services v. Louis Sullivan, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1991
  5. State Ex Rel. Iowa Department of Human Services v. PierceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1990

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Horta v. Department of Children & FamiliesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API