Legal Opinion
Quattlebaum v. Barry
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 21, 1995No. 92-CV-504PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM: **
In 1991, the Council of the District of Columbia, confronted with a serious revenue shortfall, enacted legislation, subsequently signed by the Mayor, which reduced the benefit entitlements of AFDC recipients1 to October 1, 1989 levels and eliminated the annual COLA2 which recipients had previously received. See Budget Conformity Amendment Act of 1991, D.C. Law 9-27 (August 17, 1991). Appellants, AFDC recipients who were adversely affected by these benefit reductions, brought a class action in the Superior Court against the Mayor and other District officials…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Rosado v. WymanSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Gravel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Eleanor H. Montana v. First Federal Savings and Loan Association of RochesterCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- District of Columbia v. Sierra ClubDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Washington, D.C. Ass'n of Realtors v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- Quattlebaum v. BarryDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995