Califano v. Yamasaki
Encyclopedia
Califano v. Yamasaki, was a case where the United States Supreme Court decided an issue of Federal statutory hearing rights.
Under section 204(a)(1) of the Social Security Act, the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was allowed to make recoupments of erroneous overpayments of old age, survivors' or disability benefits
by deducting from future payments. Section 204(b) allowed the Secretary to preclude the recoupment if the disability recipient was without fault and adjustments or recovery would "defeat the purposes" of the Act or "be against equity and good conscience."
Under the Department's procedures, after a recipient was notified of the ex parte
determination that an overpayment had been made, the recipient could file a written request either seeking reconsideration of that determination or asking the Secretary to waive recovery in accordance with 204(b). The recoupment would start if the agency's decision on the request went against the recipient, and an oral hearing would be granted only if the recipient continued to object to recoupment.
A number of beneficiaries challenged the Department's procedure under the due process
clause of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution.
In an opinion written by Justice Blackmun, the court held that because individual rights were at stake, the procedures did not satisfy the requirements of due process.
Under section 204(a)(1) of the Social Security Act, the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was allowed to make recoupments of erroneous overpayments of old age, survivors' or disability benefits
Disability benefits
In the United Kingdom disability benefits are benefits paid to a person who is sick or who has a disability. Disability benefits include;* Disability Living Allowance* Attendance Allowance* Incapacity Benefit* Severe Disablement Allowance...
by deducting from future payments. Section 204(b) allowed the Secretary to preclude the recoupment if the disability recipient was without fault and adjustments or recovery would "defeat the purposes" of the Act or "be against equity and good conscience."
Under the Department's procedures, after a recipient was notified of the ex parte
Ex parte
Ex parte is a Latin legal term meaning "from one party" .An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the controversy to be present. In Australian, Canadian, U.K., Indian and U.S...
determination that an overpayment had been made, the recipient could file a written request either seeking reconsideration of that determination or asking the Secretary to waive recovery in accordance with 204(b). The recoupment would start if the agency's decision on the request went against the recipient, and an oral hearing would be granted only if the recipient continued to object to recoupment.
A number of beneficiaries challenged the Department's procedure under the due process
Due process
Due process is the legal code that the state must venerate all of the legal rights that are owed to a person under the principle. Due process balances the power of the state law of the land and thus protects individual persons from it...
clause of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution.
In an opinion written by Justice Blackmun, the court held that because individual rights were at stake, the procedures did not satisfy the requirements of due process.
See also
- United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.Due to a chronic freight car shortage, Congress had enlarged the scope of the Interstate Commerce Commission's authority to prescribe per diem rate charges for the use of one company's freight...
, - List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 442