Reed v. Blinzinger, 816 F.2d 296 (7th Cir. 1987). · Go Syfert
Search
Reed v. Blinzinger, 816 F.2d 296 (7th Cir. 1987). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
23 citation events across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Patrick Addis v. Gerald Whitburn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services (ca7, 1998-10-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Patrick Addis v. Gerald Whitburn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
7th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Reed v. Blinzinger, 816 F.2d 296, 297 (7th Cir.1987), aff'g & adopting, 639 F.Supp. 130 (S.D.Ind.1986); see also, e.g., Malloy v. Eichler, 860 F.2d 1179, 1183-84 (3d Cir.1988); Mitchell v. Lipscomb, 851 F.2d 734, 736 (4th Cir.1988); Olson v. Norman, 830 F.2d 811, 818-20 (8th Cir.1987); Vance, 793 F.2d at 1024 ; Childress v. Bowen, 833 F.2d 231, 233 (10th Cir.1987); State of Georgia Dep’t of Medical Assistance v. Bowen, 846 F.2d 708, 711 (11th Cir.1988).
discussed Cited "see" Olson v. Norman
8th Cir. · 1987 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, Reed v. Blinzinger, 639 F.Supp. 130 (S.D.Ind.1986) aff’d 816 F.2d 296 (7th Cir.1987) (adopting opinion below); Malloy v. Eichler, 628 F.Supp. 582, 596-97 (D.Del.1986). . “[W]hen Ms. Bechen was cancelled from AFDC benefits her own Medicaid benefits were also properly cancelled because both the AFDC and Medicaid programs allow for consideration of parental income to a child under the age of 21." Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellees at 32. .
discussed Cited "see" 19 soc.sec.rep.ser. 338, Medicare&medicaid Gu 36,673 Diane Olson Lorrie Greene, by Her Legal Guardians, Michael and Jacquolyn Wright and Jennifer Kay Bechen, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Similarly Situated v. Nancy A. Norman, Commissioner, Iowa Department of Human Services v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Third Party Diane Olson Lorrie Greene, by Her Legal Guardians, Michael and Jacquolyn Wright and Jennifer Kay Bechen, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Similarly Situated v. Nancy A. Norman, Commissioner, Iowa Department of Human Services v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Third Party
3rd Cir. · 1987 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, Reed v. Blinzinger, 639 F.Supp. 130 (S.D.Ind.1986) aff'd 816 F.2d 296 (7th Cir.1987) (adopting opinion below); Malloy v. Eichler, 628 F.Supp. 582, 596-97 (D.Del.1986) 13 "[W]hen Ms. Bechen was cancelled from AFDC benefits her own Medicaid benefits were also properly cancelled because both the AFDC and Medicaid programs allow for consideration of parental income to a child under the age of 21." Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellees at 32 14 The Secretary's position has not always been clear.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
17 soc.sec.rep.ser. 411, Medicare&medicaid Gu 36,244 Brenda Reed, for Herself and Her Minor Children Michael Reed and Tony Reed Linda Evans, for Herself and Her Minor Child Thedell Atwone Polk, and for All Others Similarly Situated
v.
Donald L. Blinzinger, in His Official Capacity as Administrator of the Indiana State Department of Public Welfare, and Otis R. Bowen, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services
86-1780.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Apr 9, 1987.
816 F.2d 296
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

816 F.2d 296

17 Soc.Sec.Rep.Ser. 411, Medicare&Medicaid Gu 36,244
Brenda REED, for herself and her minor children Michael Reed
and Tony Reed; Linda Evans, for herself and her minor child
Thedell Atwone Polk, and for all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Donald L. BLINZINGER, in his official capacity as
Administrator of the Indiana State Department of Public
Welfare, and Otis R. Bowen, M.D., Secretary of Health and
Human Services, Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 86-1780, 86-1816.

United States Court of Appeals,
Seventh Circuit.

Argued Nov. 7, 1986.
Decided April 2, 1987.
As Corrected April 9, 1987.

James R. Goeser, U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services, Chicago, Ill., John Daniel Tinder, U.S. Atty., for defendants-appellants.

Dennis Frick, East Central Legal Services Program, Indianapolis, Ind., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Before BAUER, Chief Judge, CUMMINGS, and FLAUM, Circuit Judges.

BAUER, Chief Judge.

1

We hereby adopt the thorough and well reasoned district court opinion written by Judge Steckler below, Reed v. Blinzinger, 639 F.Supp. 130 (S.D.Ind.1986), and also concur in the reasoning of the Ninth Circuit's decision in Vance v. Hegstrom, 793 F.2d 1018 (9th Cir.1986). We believe that both the district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals correctly determined that the express exclusion of sibling income in determining Medicaid eligibility, see 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1396a(a)(17)(D), is not contradicted by any clear expression of legislative intent, notwithstanding the Secretary of Health and Human Services' misinterpretation of Section 2640 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 602(a)(38) (1984). We, therefore, adopt the district court's opinion in full.[1]

1

In so doing, we take no position as to the constitutionality of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 602(a)(38) (1984) regarding AFDC eligibility, as that issue was not raised before this court. See Baldwin v. Ledbetter, 647 F.Supp. 623 (D.Ga.1986) (holding that as applied to AFDC eligibility, Section 2640 violates the Takings Clause and the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments)