Jeanine R. Smith, Successor Party in Interest, Rosette v. Guidet, Deceased v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of H. E. W.

597 F.2d 152 Jeanine R. SMITH, Successor Party in Interest, Rosette V. Guidet, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joseph A. CALIFANO, Jr., Secretary of H. E. W., Defendant-Appellee. No. 77-1296. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. March 9, 1979. Rehearing Denied June 4, 1979. Thomas E. Hookano (argued), Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. Dwayne Keyes, U. S. Atty., Sacramento, Cal., William Kanter, Atty. of Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Leonard Schaitman, Atty. (argued), Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Before MERRILL and CHOY, Circuit Judges, and MURRAY, * District Judge. CHOY, Circuit Judge: 1 Jeanine R. Smith, as successor in interest to Rosette V. Guidet, appeals from the district court's granting of summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (the Secretary). We affirm.I. Statement of the Case 2 The parties are agreed on the essential facts. Ms. Smith's grandmother, Rosette V. Guidet, was born in 1895. She was widowed and suffering from a sight limitation and amputated leg. On January 1, 1974, Mrs. Guidet was…

Jeanine R. Smith, as successor in interest to Rosette Y. Guidet, appeals from the district court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (the Secretary). We affirm.

*154 I. Statement of the Case

The parties are agreed on the essential facts. Ms. Smith’s grandmother, Rosette V. Guidet, was born in 1895. She was widowed and suffering from a sight limitation and amputated leg. On January 1, 1974, Mrs. Guidet was placed in a board and care facility by Smith’s husband with the assistance of the Sacramento County Welfare Department. Though it was understood that the costs of care would be paid by public assistance programs, 1 Mr. Smith signed the admissions agreement, providing for payment of $250 a month in advance.

In late January and early February, Mrs. Guidet completed the necessary applications for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 1381 . Mrs. Guidet died on March 6, 1974, before the Social Security Administration (SSA) completed its processing of her application. Without completing an eligibility determination, 2 the SSA denied payment to Mrs. Smith or her successors…

dissenting:

I dissent. I would reverse and restore the decision of the ALJ.

Under the Secretary’s construction of § 1631(b), as adopted by the majority opinion, the recipient is deprived of any ability to secure credit on the basis of his SSI payments that would survive death. Without such credit, private homes for the aged and infirm are not likely to welcome those without independent financial resources and the Act fails to provide adequately for those most in need of their SSI payments. The Act, with the Secretary’s blessing, seems to work most zealously against its own apparent purpose.

The majority opinion relies on the fact that § 1631(b) does not include the words “other persons” which are to be found in § 1631(a). However Regulations 416.601(a) and (b) are broadly stated to permit payment to one other than the eligible individual in all cases where it appears to the administration that the interest of the recipient would be served. That should cover this case.

In footnote 7 the majority opinion rejects the application of those regulations to § 1631(b), stating that to apply them would “abrogate the limits of [that section] that Congress intended to apply to…