675 F.2d 44 (2nd Cir. 1982), 81-7278, Calkins v. Blum

Docket Nº:81-7278 and 81-7214.
Citation:675 F.2d 44
Party Name:Kenneth CALKINS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants, Curtise Williams, et al., Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Cross-Appellants-Appellees, v. Barbara B. BLUM, Individually and as Commissioner of the New York State Dept. of Social Services, et al., Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees. Phyllis COREY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Barbara BLUM, as Commis
Case Date:March 18, 1982
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Page 44

675 F.2d 44 (2nd Cir. 1982)

Kenneth CALKINS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants,

Curtise Williams, et al.,

Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Cross-Appellants-Appellees,

v.

Barbara B. BLUM, Individually and as Commissioner of the New

York State Dept. of Social Services, et al.,

Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.

Phyllis COREY, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Barbara BLUM, as Commissioner of the New York State

Department of Social Services, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 178, 414, 197 and 179, Dockets 81-7218, 81-7276,

81-7278 and 81-7214.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

March 18, 1982

Argued Nov. 18, 1981.

Alan W. Rubenstein, Asst. Atty. Gen., Albany, N.Y. (Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen. of State of N.Y., William J. Kogan, Asst. Sol. Gen., Albany, N.Y., on brief), for defendant-appellant-cross-appellee State Com'r of Social Services.

James H. Hughes, Syracuse, N.Y. (Ira S. Dubnoff, Syracuse, N.Y., on brief), for defendant-appellant-cross-appellee John L. Lascaris.

Rene H. Reixach, Rochester, N.Y. (Maurie Heins, Syracuse, N.Y., Paul M. Ryther, Bath, N.Y., Raymond Rodriguez, Batavia, N.Y., on brief), for plaintiffs-appellees-cross-appellants Kenneth Calkins, et al.

Cornell Legal Aid Clinic, Barry Strom, Strom, Masson & Pozner, Ithaca, N.Y., on brief (Sharon Brautigam, law student, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee Phyllis Corey.

Before TIMBERS and NEWMAN, Circuit Judges, and ZAMPANO, [*] District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

In these related appeals, plaintiffs challenge the administration of New York's

Page 45

Medicaid program during the time period prior to New York's conversion to a "209b" plan, 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(f) (1976), on August 29, 1980 and prior to the changes in the Medicaid statute enacted by the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981, Pub.L.No.97-35. Under the Medicaid statute in effect during this period, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1396-1396k, states choosing to participate had to provide medical assistance to the "categorically needy"-those aged, blind, or disabled individuals and families qualifying for federal cash assistance under the Supplementary Security Income (SSI) program, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1383, or under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, 42 U.S.C. §§ 601-644. In addition, states could choose, as New York did to provide medical assistance to the "medically needy"-those aged, blind, or disabled individuals and families, who would qualify for SSI and AFDC benefits if their incomes were lower. 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(10)(C) (1976) (repealed). The group of medically needy thus includes those who are "SSI medically needy" and those who are "AFDC medically needy." But states choosing to aid the medically needy had to treat such recipients "comparabl(y)" to categorically needy recipients. 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(10)(C) (1976) (repealed); id. § 1396a(a)(17); Caldwell v. Blum, 621 F.2d 491 (2d Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 452 U.S. 909, 101 S.Ct. 3039, 69 L.Ed.2d 412 (1981); Greklek v. Toia, 565 F.2d 1259 (2d Cir. 1977) (per curiam ), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 962, 98 S.Ct. 3081, 57 L.Ed.2d 1128 (1978); Aitchison v. Berger, 404 F.Supp. 1137 (S.D.N.Y.1975), aff'd without opinion, 538 F.2d 307 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 890, 97 S.Ct. 246, 50 L.Ed.2d 172 (1976).

This comparability requirement is at the center of the controversy in the action before us. Plaintiffs claim that New York violated this requirement, as to SSI medically needy, by failing to apply SSI income disregards to the earned income of ineligible spouses of...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
24 practice notes
  • 938 F.Supp. 1131 (E.D.N.Y. 1996), C. A. CV-95-0850, Medicare Beneficiaries' Defense Fund v. Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Eastern District of New York
    • August 26, 1996
    ...aff'd, 403 U.S. 901, 91 S.Ct. 2202, 29 L.Ed.2d 677 (1971); Calkins v. Blum, 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1088 (N.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd on other grounds, 675 F.2d 44 (2d Cir.1982). In addition, the fact that plaintiffs also seek damages for emotional distress should not prevent class certification. See, e......
  • 754 F.2d 955 (11th Cir. 1985), 84-7050, Appleyard v. Wallace
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
    • March 8, 1985
    ...177, 54 L.Ed.2d 128 (1977); Penn v. San Juan Hospital, 528 F.2d at 1189; Calkins v. Blum, 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1088 (N.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd, 675 F.2d 44 (2d Cir.1982); Wilder v. Bernstein, 499 F.Supp. 980, 992-993 (S.D.N.Y.1980). In this case the district court was concerned by the "vast fa......
  • 652 N.E.2d 80 (Ind.App. 1995), 27A05-9311-CV-430, McCart v. Chief Executive Officer in Charge, Independent Federal Credit Union
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • June 14, 1995
    ...v. Coughlin (N.D.N.Y.1988), 697 F.Supp. 1234, 1235 n. 4; Calkins v. Blum (N.D.N.Y.1981), 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1089-90, aff'd, (2nd Cir.1982), 675 F.2d 44. Page 89 Catanzano v. Dowling (W.D.N.Y.1994), 847 F.Supp. 1070, 1079. I find that even if we were to decline to follow the lead of the Seven......
  • 124 F.R.D. 52 (S.D.N.Y. 1989), 87 CV 5779 (KMW), Luyando v. Bowen
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Southern District of New York
    • January 12, 1989
    ...plaintiff seeks retroactive benefits as well as injunctive relief. See, Calkins v. Blum, 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1089 (N.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd, 675 F.2d 44 (2d Cir.1982). Defendants then argue that plaintiff will not succeed in obtaining retroactive benefits because such an award would be barred by ......
  • Free signup to view additional results
24 cases
  • 938 F.Supp. 1131 (E.D.N.Y. 1996), C. A. CV-95-0850, Medicare Beneficiaries' Defense Fund v. Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Eastern District of New York
    • August 26, 1996
    ...aff'd, 403 U.S. 901, 91 S.Ct. 2202, 29 L.Ed.2d 677 (1971); Calkins v. Blum, 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1088 (N.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd on other grounds, 675 F.2d 44 (2d Cir.1982). In addition, the fact that plaintiffs also seek damages for emotional distress should not prevent class certification. See, e......
  • 754 F.2d 955 (11th Cir. 1985), 84-7050, Appleyard v. Wallace
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
    • March 8, 1985
    ...177, 54 L.Ed.2d 128 (1977); Penn v. San Juan Hospital, 528 F.2d at 1189; Calkins v. Blum, 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1088 (N.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd, 675 F.2d 44 (2d Cir.1982); Wilder v. Bernstein, 499 F.Supp. 980, 992-993 (S.D.N.Y.1980). In this case the district court was concerned by the "vast fa......
  • 652 N.E.2d 80 (Ind.App. 1995), 27A05-9311-CV-430, McCart v. Chief Executive Officer in Charge, Independent Federal Credit Union
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • June 14, 1995
    ...v. Coughlin (N.D.N.Y.1988), 697 F.Supp. 1234, 1235 n. 4; Calkins v. Blum (N.D.N.Y.1981), 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1089-90, aff'd, (2nd Cir.1982), 675 F.2d 44. Page 89 Catanzano v. Dowling (W.D.N.Y.1994), 847 F.Supp. 1070, 1079. I find that even if we were to decline to follow the lead of the Seven......
  • 124 F.R.D. 52 (S.D.N.Y. 1989), 87 CV 5779 (KMW), Luyando v. Bowen
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Southern District of New York
    • January 12, 1989
    ...plaintiff seeks retroactive benefits as well as injunctive relief. See, Calkins v. Blum, 511 F.Supp. 1073, 1089 (N.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd, 675 F.2d 44 (2d Cir.1982). Defendants then argue that plaintiff will not succeed in obtaining retroactive benefits because such an award would be barred by ......
  • Free signup to view additional results