Jones

Jones v. Shalala

Good Law
64 F.3d 510·1995 WL 502652
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 25, 1995No. 94-16865California1,456 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schroeder, J.

This is the second appeal in this class action suit. In Jones v. Shalala (“Jones I”), 5 F.3d 447 (9th Cir.1993), we invalidated the formula used by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) for determining a Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) applicant’s monthly benefit payments in the first three months of eligibility. We considered the Secretary’s policy of looking to a one-time nonrecurring payment each class member had received during only the first month of eligibility and reducing the individual’s benefits by the full amount of such payment in the first, second, and third months of eligibility. We held the policy violated the Supplemental Security Income for Aged, Blind, and Disabled Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (c)(2) (“the Act”). On remand, and after final judgment was entered, a dispute ensued as to the breadth of the class. The district court rejected plaintiffs’ belated contention that the class included not only SSI *512 applicants who received a particular type of income in the first month and no such income in the second and third months, but also included SSI applicants who experienced a reduction of income between the first and second months and/or…

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.