Marshall v. State Department of Human Services
Supreme Court of Iowa
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
- State Ex Rel. Weede v. Iowa Southern Utilities Co. of DelawareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
- Perley v. HeathSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
- State Ex Rel. Schlegel v. MunnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933
- 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
- State Ex Rel. Iowa Department of Human Services v. PierceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1990
3Cited by1 opinion
- Horta v. Department of Children & FamiliesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005