McWhorter v. Blum

OPINION OF THE COURT

J. Robert Lynch, J.

Petitioner made application for an additional fuel allowance (see 18 NYCRR 352.5 [c]). It was denied because the petitioner was not then a recipient of assistance nor was the additional fuel allowance an obligation whose payment had been authorized when the petitioner was a recipient (see 18 NYCRR 381.3 [d]).

The petitioner received public assistance for four months, from December into April, during which time he claims he accumulated some arrears on his fuel bill. The evidence is undisputed that the respondents failed in the duty imposed upon them by 18…