Stewart v. Butz, 73-1558.
| Decision Date | 25 January 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 73-1558.,73-1558. |
| Parties | Gloria STEWART, etc., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Earl L. BUTZ, Secretary of Agriculture, et al., Defendants-Appellants, and Gail Huecker, Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Economic Security, et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Michael Kimmel, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendants-appellants; Harlington Wood, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., George J. Long, U. S. Atty., Kathryn H. Baldwin, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., on brief.
Paul M. Cupp, Frankfort, Ky., for appellees; Graham B. Cooke, Kurt Berggren, Legal Aid Society of Louisville, Louisville, Ky., on brief for Gloria Stewart; Paul E. Tierney, Frankfort, Ky., on brief for Gail Huecker & Commonwealth of Kentucky.
Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, McCREE, Circuit Judge, and McALLISTER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Mrs. Gloria Stewart filed this class action, alleging that she was denied her right to purchase food stamps during the month of May 1972, for the stated reason that she had purchased an amount of food stamps in excess of her quota for the preceding month. There is no dispute on the record before this court that Mrs. Stewart was wrongfully denied the right to purchase food stamps during the month in question. The District Court ordered the Secretary of Agriculture to provide Mrs. Stewart with retroactive food stamp credits. The same relief was granted to any member of her class (recipients of food stamps in the Western District of Kentucky), upon establishing a right thereto.
The only question on appeal is whether the Secretary of Agriculture or the Commonwealth of Kentucky must pay for the stamps. The District Court held that the Secretary must provide the stamps and that there is no liability on the part of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The Secretary appeals.
Two Circuits, in cases cited below, have resolved this issue against the Secretary of Agriculture. At the time of oral arguments in the present case on November 30, 1973, petitions for certiorari in both of these cases were pending before the Supreme Court. The attorney for the Secretary stated to this court that denial of certiorari by the Supreme Court in these two pending cases, would be dispositive of the issue on the present appeal. On December 10, 1973, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in both of said cases.
Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Aiken v. Obledo
...479 F.2d 1084 (3rd Cir. 1973); Bermudez v. United States Dept. of Agriculture, 160 U.S.App.D.C. 150, 490 F.2d 718 (1973); Stewart v. Butz, 491 F.2d 165 (6th Cir. 1974). Forward adjustments are made by discounting the price paid for stamps by those families whose food stamp applications were......
-
Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Willingboro Tp.
...We agree with the following statement of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in its amicus curiae brief in Barrick (quoted at 491 F.2d 165): The interest of both the black and white citizens in stable communities outweighs any minor inconvenience of having to utilize alternate meth......
-
Colbeth v. Wilson
...50 percent or more of the administrative expenses associated with disbursement of benefits. See 7 U.S.C. §§ 2025, 2027; Stewart v. Butz, 491 F.2d 165 (6th Cir.1974); Bermudez v. United States Department of Agriculture, 490 F.2d 718 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., 414 U.S. 1104, 94 S.Ct. ......
-
In re Jackson Lockdown/MCO Cases
...those for damages, were raised in the class action and there was no issue raised of barring subsequent individual actions. Stewart v. Butz, 491 F.2d 165 (6th Cir.1974), merely held that the defendant Secretary of Agriculture was bound by prior adjudications as to liability in other class ac......