Cleary

Cleary v. County of Alameda

Good Law
127 Cal. Rptr. 3d 340·196 Cal. App. 4th 826·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 759
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 26, 2011No. A127935California10,954 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haerle, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

The trial court issued a writ of mandate which prohibits the County of Alameda (the County) 1 from implementing a change to its General Assistance (GA) program. That planned change, which we will refer to herein as the “W-9 policy,” would reduce the amount of a GA recipient’s monthly grant by an amount equal to his or her housing allowance when the landlord of that recipient fails or refuses to provide the County with a taxpayer identification number (TIN) on an Alameda County Substitute Form W-9.

The trial court found that the W-9 policy is unlawful because it denies GA recipients a minimally acceptable level of care, it is arbitrary and inhumane, and it constitutes an improper sanction. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 17000, 17000.5, 10000, 17001.5, subd. (a)(5).)

On appeal, the County contends that the W-9 policy does not violate any statute and that it is neither arbitrary nor capricious because the County is required to report landlord TIN information to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in order to comply with federal tax law. (See 26 U.S.C. § 6041 .) We reject the County’s contentions and, therefore, affirm the judgment.

*831 H. THE STATUTORY…

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.