Alexander

Alexander v. Glickman

Good Law
139 F.3d 733·98 Daily Journal DAR 2833·1998 WL 125109·1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 5605·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2019
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 1998Nos. 96-17054, 96-17055California1,400 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Boochever, J.

Robin Alexander’s application for food stamps was denied because her household owned a truck whose fair market value, above and beyond the $4500 allowed by the statute for a vehicle, exceeded the $2000 in household financial resources allowed by the Food Stamp Act. The district court held that the truck was an inaccessible resource under the Act because it was subject to hens exceeding its fair market value. The Secretary of Agriculture and state agencies appeal.

FACTS

Robin Alexander filed an application for food stamps for herself, her minor children, and Scott Bannister, the father of two of her children. Bannister owned a 1990 Ford pickup truck worth $6,625, which was subject to a hen of $8,300. Alexander’s appheation was denied because Bannister’s truck exceeded the reserve assets in a motor vehicle allowed by the Food Stamp Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2014 (g)(2).

Alexander brought suit in federal district court, claiming that Bannister’s truck was improperly counted as a family asset. Because the amount of the hen exceeded the truck’s value, Alexander claimed the truck should have been treated as an inaccessible resource under 7 U.S.C. § 2014 (g)(5).

The defendants (the Secretary…

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.