Legal Opinion
Sturgell v. Creasy
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided February 11, 1981No. 78-3548PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GUY, District Judge.
Appellants, Paul and Joyce Sturgell, appeal from the district court’s judgment holding that reduction of the family’s AFDC grant due to Paul Sturgell’s receipt of a veteran’s non-service connected pension is consistent with federal law and regulations, and does not violate the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Finding that neither applicable statutes and regulations nor the Constitution prohibit this reduction of benefits, we affirm.
The facts presented to the court below are not in dispute. Appellant Paul Sturgell served in…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Patricia Scott v. Clay County, Tennessee Chinn Anderson Billy Pierce Michael ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
- Hugh Whaley v. Richard S. Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Littlefield v. State, Department of Human ServicesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
- Wayne v. ShadowenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Owens v. HecklerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.