Areizaga v. Quern, 78-1189
| Decision Date | 12 December 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 78-1189,78-1189 |
| Citation | 590 F.2d 226 |
| Parties | Ramona AREIZAGA et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Arthur F. QUERN, etc., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Ellen P. Brewin, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Chicago, Ill., for defendants-appellants.
Alan J. Barak, Robert E. Lehrer, Legal Assistance Foundation, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs-appellees.
Before FAIRCHILD, Chief Judge, and WISDOM * and WOOD, Circuit Judges.
The question this case presents is whether an applicant for public aid can gain access to his entire case file during administrative review of a decision to deny or reduce assistance payments. The admitted practice of the defendant-appellant, the Illinois Department of Public Aid (IDPA), is to permit Illinois claimants for and recipients of public aid to examine only the portions of their case files that the IDPA relies upon as evidence against them at the appellate hearing. In two comprehensive memorandum opinions the district court judge examined the language and history of a federal regulation, promulgated by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, that grants an applicant or recipient of aid the opportunity to inspect the "contents of his case file and all documents and records to be used by the agency at the hearing." 45 C.F.R. 205.10(a)(13)(i). We agree with the district court's conclusion that this regulation compels the IDPA to disclose the entire contents of a welfare recipient's files. See Page v. Preisser, 585 F.2d 336 (8th Cir. 1978); Feld v. Berger, 424 F.Supp. 1356 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).
The IDPA asked that we limit the scope of the district court's order by permitting disclosure of sensitive medical records only to a doctor, lawyer, or other suitable representative of the welfare claimant. We agree, however, with the district court's observation, in its second opinion, that the federal regulation does not leave open the question whether certain material in the case file should be disclosed directly to the welfare applicant. The appellant's request should be directed, instead, to the agency which issued the controlling regulation. We note, moreover, that the "suitable individual" to whom IDPA proposes to disclose medical records may be unavailable to the welfare claimant, who is usually not represented by an attorney at these hearings.
This court has carefully studied the opinions of the district judge in this case, Judge Bernard M. Decker....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doston v. Duffy
...to examine case files in advance of the hearing. Areizaga v. Quern, 442 F.Supp. 168, 172-73 (N.D.Ill. 1977), aff'd, 590 F.2d 226 (7th Cir.1978) (per curiam). 19. The due process clause requires that a state agency explain, in terms comprehensible to the client, exactly what the agency propo......
-
Bizjak v. Blum
...for jurisdiction. See Page v. Preisser, 585 F.2d 336 (8th Cir. 1978); Areizaga v. Quern, 442 F.Supp. 168 (N.D.Ill.1977), aff'd. 590 F.2d 226 (7th Cir. 1978); Feld v. Berger, 424 F.Supp. 1356 Class Certification Plaintiff seeks to represent a class composed of all persons within New York Sta......
-
Smith v. Miller
...v. Swank, 404 U.S. 282, 92 S.Ct. 502, 30 L.Ed.2d 448 (1971); King v. Smith, 392 U.S. at 317, 88 S.Ct. at 2133; Areizaga v. Quern, 590 F.2d 226, 227 (7th Cir. 1978); Stanton v. Bond, 504 F.2d 1246, 1247 (7th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 984, 95 S.Ct. 1415, 43 L.Ed.2d 666 (1975). Injunc......
-
Hyzy v. Baker
...examination, copying,and notetaking of case files before and during public assistance benefits administrative hearings), aff'd, 590 F.2d 226 (7th Cir. 1978); see also United States v. Fisher, 864 F.2d 434, 436 (7th Cir. 1988) (holding that "when a court issues an injunction, it automaticall......