Joseph Baur v. F. David Mathews, Secretary of Hew

Joseph Baur represents a class of residents of public alcoholic treatment centers in Los Angeles County, California, who are seeking reinstatement of Supplemental Security Income benefits to them under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq. The Secretary of H.E.W. discontinued their benefits because they were found by an administrative law judge to be inmates of a public institution who are ineligible for supplemental income payments under 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (e)(1)(A). The District Court for the Central District of California affirmed the findings of the administrative law judge. On appeal Baur contends: (1) his classification as an “inmate” under 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (e)(1)(A) is not authorized by the act, and (2) even if properly classified as an inmate, he qualifies for the regulatory exception for residents of a public vocational training institution under 20 C.F.R. § 416.231 (b)(3). We agree with the district court that the agency’s interpretation and application of the statute is correct and AFFIRM.

I. FACTS.

Appellants are residents of the public alcoholic treatment centers in Los Angeles County, California, known as Antelope Valley Rehabilitation…

concurring and dissenting:

I agree with the majority that Congress did not intend SSI to replace state support for inmates of state institutions. I do not agree, however, that Congress intended to deny SSI to persons otherwise eligible in state institutions when they or their families were legally liable to the state for their support. When the person’s estate or family is billed for his support, the state does not “furnish” it within the meaning of 20 C.F.R. § 416.231 (b)(1). Rather, the state has simply acted as a conduit for support the estate or family has furnished. Such a person does not meet the definition of an inmate of an institution, and therefore remains eligible for SSI benefits to the extent of his estate’s or family’s liability.

I would remand the case to the district court, with instructions to grant relief to any AVRC resident who can show that the state is holding him or his family legally liable for his support.

578 F.2d 228 Joseph BAUR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. F. David MATHEWS, Secretary of HEW, Respondent-Appellee. No. 76-2688. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. May 5, 1978. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 13, 1978. Philip L. Goar, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner-appellant. Carolyn M. Reynolds, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before CARTER, GOODWIN and WALLACE, Circuit Judges. JAMES M. CARTER, Circuit Judge: 1 Joseph Baur represents a class of residents of public alcoholic treatment centers in Los Angeles County, California, who are seeking reinstatement of Supplemental Security Income benefits to them under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq. The Secretary of H.E.W. discontinued their benefits because they were found by an administrative law judge to be inmates of a public institution who are ineligible for supplemental income payments under 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (e)(1)(A). The District Court for the Central District of California affirmed the findings of the administrative law judge. On appeal Baur contends: (1)…