Citation network
Burns Vs. Alcala
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 18, 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
-
U.S. 575 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Burns v. AlcalaSearch
-
U.S. 575 (1975) Burns v. AlcalaSearch
-
unless they are excluded or aid is made optional by another provision of the Act. New York Dept. of Social Services v. DublinoSearch
-
King v. SmithSearch
-
to exclude them from coverage, in effect creating a presumption of coverage when the statute is ambiguous. See Carver v. HookerSearch
-
Stuart v. CanarySearch
-
Green v. StantonSearch
-
F.Supp. 123, 125-126 (ND Ind.1973), aff'd sub nom. Wilson v. WeaverSearch
-
F.2d 155 (CA7 1974). But see Mixon v. KellerSearch
-
given their ordinary meaning in the absence of persuasive reasons Page 420 U. S. 581 to the contrary, Banks v. ChicagoSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Minor v. MechanicsSearch
-
H.R.Rep. No. 615, 74th Cong., 1st Sess., 10 (1935). See Wisdom v. NortonSearch
-
to a consistent, longstanding interpretation of a statute by the agency charged with its administration. See FMB v. IsbrandtsenSearch
-
Burnet v. ChicagoSearch
-
Mixon v. KellerSearch
-
federal participation in state programs ancillary to those expressly provided in the Social Security Act, see Wisdom v. NortonSearch
-
as a form of temporary aid to individuals who are in the process of qualifying under federal standards. See Parks v. HardenSearch
-
See Hagans v. LavineSearch
-
The cases are cited in Parks v. HardenSearch
-
See United States v. SouthernSearch
-
A number of other provisions of the Act would be similarly inapplicable to unborn children. See Murrow v. CliffordSearch
-
As Judge Weinfeld's opinion for the Second Circuit in Wisdom v. NortonSearch
-
Parks v. HardenSearch
-
F.2d at 872. See also Carver v. HookerSearch
-
Wilson v. WeaverSearch
-
to suppose that they thought HEW had misinterpreted the Act, and wanted to make the original intent clear. See Wilson v. WeaverSearch
-
a) after all. After this Court's decisions in King v. SmithSearch
-
U. S. 309 (1968), Townsend v. SwankSearch
-
U. S. 282 (1971), and Carleson v. RemillardSearch
-
a) include the First, the Fourth, the Fifth, and the Seventh Circuits, see Carver v. HookerSearch
-
Doe v. LukhardSearch
-
F.2d 155 (CA7 1974). Only the Second Circuit has taken the opposite view, Wisdom v. NortonSearch
-
FTC v. RuberoidSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Burns v. AlcalaSearch
-
of the Act. New York Dept. of Social Services v. DublinoSearch
-
See Carver v. HookerSearch
-
Banks v. ChicagoSearch
-
See Wisdom v. NortonSearch
-
See FMB v. IsbrandtsenSearch
-
Wisdom v. NortonSearch
-
See Parks v. HardenSearch
-
See Murrow v. CliffordSearch
-
Carver v. HookerSearch
-
See Wilson v. WeaverSearch
-
and Carleson v. RemillardSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial