DANIEL, DIRECTOR, COOK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC AID, ET AL.

v.

GOLIDAY ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Almenares v. Wyman, 453 F.2d 1075 (2d Cir. 1971)
  …months later the Court, in reversing and remanding a judgment which invalidated a reduction of benefits in advance of a Goldberg type hearing, recognized that the question might — or might not— [*1083] receive a different answer. Daniel v. Goliday, 398 U.S. 73, 90 S.Ct. 1722, 26 L.Ed.2d 57 (1970). Whatever the ultímate answer may be, the constitutional question remains substantial, all that is here required. See Merriweather v. Burson, 439 F. 2d 1092, 1093 (5 Cir. 1971). Moreover, as indicated above, at l…
• Velazco v. Minter, 481 F.2d 573 (1st Cir. 1973)
  …se before us. Those cases dealt only with the procedural due process required when a state “terminates public assistance payments to a particular recipient.” Goldberg, supra, 397 U.S. at 255, 90 S.Ct. at 1014 (emphasis added). See Daniel v. Goliday, 398 U.S. 73, 90 S.Ct. 1722, 26 L.Ed.2d 57 (1970). Nor is our decision' -governed^byTEe many eases holding that; Goldberg applies to individual reductions, as well as terminations of aid.4 Similar-j [*577] ly, we need not consider the cases concerning the applic…
• Merriweather v. Burson, 439 F.2d 1092 (5th Cir. 1971)
  …due process of law set out in Goldberg v. Kelly, supra. The department appealed from this decision. After the district court made its determination in the instant case the United States Supreme Court rendered its opinion in Daniel v. Goliday, 1970, 398 U.S. 73, 90 S.Ct. 1722, 26 L.Ed.2d 57. In Daniel the Supreme Court said: “The court below has held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to provide a recipient of public welfare benefits with notice and a hearing prior to…

Authorities Cited

• Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (U.S. 1970)
• Wheeler v. Montgomery, 397 U.S. 280 (U.S. 1970)