Creaton

Creaton v. Heckler

Good Law
625 F. Supp. 26·1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18687
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 20, 1985CV 85-3306-RCalifornia1,255 words

Opinion

Opinion

Real, J.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter came on for hearing before the Court on May 24, 1985 and on June 5, 1985. The Court having considered the pleadings, motions, memoranda of law, declarations, affidavit, exhibits, other papers and oral argument of counsel, being duly advised in the premises, makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. On May 17, 1985, plaintiffs Penny Creaton (“CREATON”), Patricia Walker (“WALKER”) and Dolores Anspach (“ANSPACH”), on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, brought a Class Action Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331 , 1343(a)(3) and 1361, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief against the defendants. Plaintiffs challenge implementation in California of federal and state regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 2640(a) of the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984, Pub.L. No. 98-369, 98 Stat. 1145 (1984) (“DRA”), which amended 42 U.S.C. § 602 (a) by adding a subpart 38, 42 U.S.C. § 602 (a)(38). Pursuant to the DRA, the SECRETARY amended 45 C.F.R. § 206 .-10(a)(vii) to conform with the new law. See 49 C.F.R. 35586 (Sept. 10, 1984).

2. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.