Heitz v. State, Department of Health & Social Services
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WINFREE, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
Alleged prior overpayments of foster care reimbursements were recouped by the state through a deduction from a much-later monthly foster care reimbursement payment. The foster parent contends the state violated her due process rights by not providing adequate notice or opportunity to be heard before the recoupment. The superior court held that the due process clause did not protect the foster parent's interest in receiving foster care reimbursement payments and ruled in favor of the state. Because a foster parent has a property interest in state foster…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Frontier Saloon, Inc. v. Alcoholic Beverage Control BoardAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Smart v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2010
- Gottstein v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2010
- Patrick v. Municipality of Anchorage, Anchorage Transportation CommissionAlaska Supreme Court · 2013
- Pfeifer v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Division of Public AssistanceAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
- McGlinchy v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2015
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.