45 C.F.R. § 303.35
Administrative complaint procedure
(a) Each State must have in place an administrative complaint procedure, defined by the State, in place to allow individuals the opportunity to request an administrative review, and take appropriate action when there is evidence that an error has occurred or an action should have been taken on their case. This includes both individuals in the State and individuals from other States.
(b) A State need not establish a formal hearing process but must have clear procedures in place. The State must notify individuals of the procedures, make them available for recipients of IV-D services to use when requesting such a review, and use them for notifying recipients of the results of the review and any actions taken.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 2001–2008 · leading case: Hughlett v. Romer-Sensky, 497 F.3d 557 (6th Cir. 2006).
Hughlett v. Romer-Sensky, 497 F.3d 557 (6th Cir. 2006). “Ohio has implemented such a remedial scheme. See Ohio Admin. Code §§ 5101:6-8 and 5101:6-9.”
Risenhoover v. Washington Cnty. Cmty. Servs., 545 F. Supp. 2d 885 (D. Minnesota 2008). “” 45 C.F.R. § 303.35 (2007). These procedures satisfy procedural due process.”
Weinstein v. Albright, 261 F.3d 127 (2d Cir. 2001). “If the administrative review results in a revised state determination that the person does not owe more than $5000 in past due child support, federal defendants insist in papers submitted to this Court, a system is in place to ensure that such information is immediately relayed…”
Hughlett v. Romer-Sensky (6th Cir. 2006). “Ohio has implemented such a remedial scheme.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.