Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture, Civ. A. No. 2553-71.

CourtUnited States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
Writing for the CourtRobert M. Werdig, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., for defendants
Citation369 F. Supp. 1094
Decision Date12 December 1973
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 2553-71.
PartiesMiriam RODWAY et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE et al., Defendants.

369 F. Supp. 1094

Miriam RODWAY et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 2553-71.

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

December 12, 1973.


369 F. Supp. 1095

Michael B. Trister, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.

Robert M. Werdig, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., for defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN H. PRATT, District Judge.

Preliminary Statement

This action arises on cross-motions for summary judgment and raises issues concerning the administration of the Food Stamp Program (hereinafter referred to as "the program"), authorized by the Food Stamp Act of 1964, as amended, 7 U.S.C. §§ 2011-2026 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The program is administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as "the Department").

The purpose of the program is to provide low-income households the opportunity to obtain nutritionally adequate diets. This is accomplished by issuing to eligible households coupon allotments which have a monetary value greater than the charge, if any, which such households must pay for their allotments. Under the program, all eligible households of a given size receive a coupon allotment having the same monetary value.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in a decision dated July 10, 1973, reversed the order of this Court granting defendants' motion for summary judgment on

369 F. Supp. 1096
the basis of mootness. The case was remanded to this Court for further proceedings. Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture, 157 U.S.App. D.C., 133, 482 F.2d 722

Plaintiffs' position in this litigation is founded upon two primary bases. First, plaintiffs allege the Economy Food Plan upon which the coupon allotments under the program are based does not constitute a nutritionally adequate diet. Second, plaintiffs allege the coupon allotments established by the Department are not adequate to permit participants in the program to purchase the quantities and types of food recommended in the Economy Food Plan. As an adjunct to their second position, plaintiffs assert the cost of foods recommended in the Economy Plan is higher in the Northeast than in other regions of the United States.

Annual Adjustment of Coupon Allotments

With respect to plaintiffs' second basis for seeking relief, i.e., allotments levels are below the cost of the Economy Plan, the parties agree the issue is appropriate for resolution by summary judgment.

Plaintiffs have submitted evidence, based upon statistics issued by the Department, purporting to show coupon allotments presently in effect are inadequate to purchase food constituting the Economy Food Plan at the prices as of August, 1973. While this may well be the case, it is not a relevant criterion for determining whether defendants' actions, challenged herein, are in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The Act does not require that the value of the coupon allotment be, at all times, sufficient to purchase the Economy Food Plan. Until its recent amendment1 section 7(a) of the Act2 read as follows:

"The face value of the coupon allotment which State agencies shall be authorized to issue to any households certified as eligible to participate in the food stamp program shall be in such amount as the Secretary determines to be the cost of a nutritionally adequate diet, adjusted annually to reflect changes in the prices of food published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the Department of Labor." (Emphasis added)

Thus, the Act, as originally enacted, contemplated annual adjustment of coupon allotments. Pursuant to this authority, the Department established a coupon allotment for a hypothetical family of four at $108, effective July 1, 1971. The $108 allotment was based upon the price of food as of December, 1970. Each year since, the Department has adjusted the allotment annually, effective as of July 1 each year, on the basis of the price of food as of the preceding December.

It necessarily follows that coupon allotments in effect during a year did not precisely reflect changes in the cost of food occurring during the year. In this regard, the 1973 amendments (footnote 1, supra) amended section 7(a) of the Act to provide for semiannual adjustments of coupon allotments. Section 3(m) of the 1973 Act, amended section 7(a) of the Act as follows:

"The face value of the coupon allotment which State agencies shall be authorized to issue to any households certified as eligible to participate in the food stamp program shall be in such amount as the Secretary determines to be the cost of a nutritionally adequate diet, adjusted semiannually by the nearest dollar increment that is a multiple of two to
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Rodway v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, No. 74-1303
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 12 Junio 1975
    ...summary judgment and denied appellants' motion for partial summary judgment. Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture, D.D.C., 369 F.Supp. 1094 (1973). Appellants again appealed to this court. At oral argument it became apparent that the Secretary's compliance with the procedural r......
  • Bennett v. Butz, No. 4-73 Civ. 284.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • 11 Octubre 1974
    ...increase in the cost of food in fiscal 1973. The former issue was raised in Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture, 369 F.Supp. 1094 (D.D.C.1973) on remand from 157 U.S.App.D.C. 133, 482 F.2d 722 (1973). This decision is again on appeal to the Court of Appeals. It appears to the ......
  • Fred Kraus & Sons, Inc. v. United States, No. 72 H 122.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • 11 Febrero 1974
    ...lien creditor without knowledge even though he personally has knowledge of the security interest. Acts 1963, ch. 317, § 9-301, p. 539. 369 F. Supp. 1094 19-9-401. Place of filing—Erroneous filing—Removal of collateral. —(1) The proper place to file in order to perfect a security interest is......
  • In re Zupancic, BAP No. CC-82-1255-VAbP
    • United States
    • Bankruptcy Appellate Panels. U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Ninth Circuit
    • 30 Abril 1984
    ...that may be drawn from the evidence. Rodway v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 482 F.2d 722 (D.C.Cir.1973), 157 U.S.App.D.C. 133, on remand 369 F.Supp. 1094, remanded 514 F.2d 809, 168 U.S.App. D.C. 387. While it appears that the court below was of the view that debtor was not likely to prevail,......
4 cases
  • Rodway v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, No. 74-1303
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 12 Junio 1975
    ...summary judgment and denied appellants' motion for partial summary judgment. Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture, D.D.C., 369 F.Supp. 1094 (1973). Appellants again appealed to this court. At oral argument it became apparent that the Secretary's compliance with the procedural r......
  • Bennett v. Butz, No. 4-73 Civ. 284.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • 11 Octubre 1974
    ...increase in the cost of food in fiscal 1973. The former issue was raised in Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture, 369 F.Supp. 1094 (D.D.C.1973) on remand from 157 U.S.App.D.C. 133, 482 F.2d 722 (1973). This decision is again on appeal to the Court of Appeals. It appears to the ......
  • Fred Kraus & Sons, Inc. v. United States, No. 72 H 122.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • 11 Febrero 1974
    ...lien creditor without knowledge even though he personally has knowledge of the security interest. Acts 1963, ch. 317, § 9-301, p. 539. 369 F. Supp. 1094 19-9-401. Place of filing—Erroneous filing—Removal of collateral. —(1) The proper place to file in order to perfect a security interest is......
  • In re Zupancic, BAP No. CC-82-1255-VAbP
    • United States
    • Bankruptcy Appellate Panels. U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Ninth Circuit
    • 30 Abril 1984
    ...that may be drawn from the evidence. Rodway v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 482 F.2d 722 (D.C.Cir.1973), 157 U.S.App.D.C. 133, on remand 369 F.Supp. 1094, remanded 514 F.2d 809, 168 U.S.App. D.C. 387. While it appears that the court below was of the view that debtor was not likely to prevail,......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT