Frieda Rosenberg v. Elliot Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, Chief Judge:
Although preservation of the fisc is a laudable goal, public officials must pursue it with discretion, lest deserving individuals be deprived of payments Congress clearly intended them to have. This maxim applies with even greater force when the benefits are not governmental largesse, but instead have been purchased by or for the claimant. It is therefore difficult to understand why the Government has, in this case, spent seven years and untold thousands of dollars in administrative and legal fees in a seemingly rigid and arbitrary attempt to deprive Frieda…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Minnie Gold v. The Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
- Cabell v. MarkhamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Markham v. CabellSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Sylvia Haberman v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
- Devlin Adams, by Rossini Adams, His Parent and Natural Guardian v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
3Cited by56 opinions
- Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Claire Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Stieberger v. HecklerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1985
- Mary Davis, Cross-Appellant v. Joseph A. Califano, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1979
- Jeffrey Bonkowski v. Oberg Industries IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2015
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.