Legal Opinion
Ward v. Thomas
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided March 31, 1998No. CIV. 3:95CV1284 (JBA)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PARTIES’ CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [docs. 83 and 88]
ARTERTON, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in this action initially alleged that defendant’s proposed reduction in their monthly AFDC benefits effective August 1, 1995, involving the manner in which defendant intended to compute plaintiffs’ AFDC benefits by attributing to them a portion of their housing subsidies as unearned income, violated federal law and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Finding that plaintiffs had demonstrated both irreparable harm, and the likelihood of success on the merits of their claim…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Quern v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Krasaundra Ward, Akilah Bittle, Denise Miller, Yecenia Rivera, Philomena Collins, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Anne C. Clark, Jennifer Sherard, and Avery Fitzpatrick, Intervenors-Plaintiffs-Appellees v. Joyce Thomas, Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Social Services, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Third-Party-DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Ward v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000