Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Van Lare Vs. Hurley

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 19, 1975

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

37 entries 1 linked 36 unlinked
Show
  1. Townsend Vs. Swank US Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1971
  2. U.S. 338 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Van Lare v. Hurley
    Search
  3. U.S. 338 (1975) Van Lare v. Hurley
    Search
  4. is barred from assuming that nonlegally responsible persons will apply their resources to aid the welfare child, King v. Smith
    Search
  5. Lewis v. Martin
    Search
  6. federal regulations. We conclude that the state provisions conflict with federal law, and are therefore invalid. King v. Smith
    Search
  7. by the Social Security Act of 1935. Its operation has been described in several recent opinions. See, e.g., Rosado v. Wyman
    Search
  8. King v. Smith
    Search
  9. seek to qualify for federal AFDC funding must operate a program not in conflict with the Social Security Act. Townsend v. Swank
    Search
  10. the judgments, and remanded for convention of a three-judge court to decide the constitutional challenges. Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  11. in No. 74-453, we vacate the judgment in that case and remand with directions to dismiss as moot. Cf. United States v. Munsingwear
    Search
  12. a) was previously construed in King v. Smith
    Search
  13. at 392 U. S. 333 . The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) codified the holding of King v. Smith
    Search
  14. a). We applied this regulation in Lewis v. Martin
    Search
  15. a), and King v. Smith
    Search
  16. may be contributing nothing to Page 421 U. S. 347 the needy child. King v. Smith
    Search
  17. supra, and Lewis v. Martin
    Search
  18. But States may not seek to accomplish policies aimed at lodgers by depriving needy children of benefits. King v. Smith
    Search
  19. Together with No. 74-5054, Taylor et al. v. Lavine
    Search
  20. Petitioner Hurley's action was brought in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. Hurley v. Van
    Search
  21. Lare, 72 Civ. 3423. Petitioners Taylor and Otey brought their action in the Eastern District of New York. Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  22. Hurley v. Van
    Search
  23. Lare, 365 F.Supp. 186 (SDNY 1973). The opinion of the District Judge in Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  24. See Lewis v. Martin
    Search
  25. law, for the reasons stated by Judge Hays in his opinion for the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  26. is not constitutionally impermissible, for the reasons set forth by Judge Hays in his dissenting opinion in Hurley v. Van
    Search
  27. U.S. Supreme Court Van Lare v. Hurley
    Search
  28. the Social Security Act. Townsend v. Swank
    Search
  29. Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  30. Cf. United States v. Munsingwear
    Search
  31. of King v. Smith
    Search
  32. and King v. Smith
    Search
  33. and Lewis v. Martin
    Search
  34. the Southern District of New York. Hurley v. Van
    Search
  35. the Eastern District of New York. Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  36. the Second Circuit. Taylor v. Lavine
    Search
  37. Rosado v. Wyman
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial