Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Batterton Vs. Francis

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 20, 1977

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

48 entries 4 linked 44 unlinked
Show
  1. Morton Vs. Ruiz US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1974
  2. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park Vs. Volpe US Supreme Court · Mar 02, 1971
  3. Philbrook Vs. Glodgett US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1975
  4. Shea Vs. Vialpando US Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1974
  5. U.S. 416 (1977) U.S. Supreme Court Batterton v. Francis
    Search
  6. U.S. 416 (1977) Batterton v. Francis
    Search
  7. thus eliminating the practice of removing needy children in situations of that kind to institutions. See Burns v. Alcala
    Search
  8. it was contemplated that other programs would alleviate that problem by attacking unemployment directly. See Carleson v. Remillard
    Search
  9. King v. Smith
    Search
  10. incentives, but the federal role in these programs is not so great as in AFDC. See Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search
  11. a). See Philbrook v. Glodgett
    Search
  12. and HEW supervision. Funding is provided from state and federal revenues on a matching basis. See, e.g., Shea v. Vialpando
    Search
  13. the federal regulation prescribing standards for the determination of unemployment under the AFDC-UF program. Francis v. Davidson
    Search
  14. the injunction on the ground that the amended federal regulation now was in conflict with the federal statute. Francis v. Davidson
    Search
  15. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. There the case was consolidated with an appeal in a similar case, Bethea v. Mason
    Search
  16. in Title II of the Social Security Act included a backpay award. Social Security Board v. Nierotko
    Search
  17. simply because it would have interpreted the statute in a different manner. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. United
    Search
  18. a), is within the statutory authority delegated to the Secretary, and is reasonable. v. The
    Search
  19. a). Philbrook v. Glodgett
    Search
  20. was permitted to adopt a somewhat more liberal hours-worked test than the minimum required by the Secretary. Macias v. Finch
    Search
  21. legitimate local Page 432 U. S. 432 policies in determining eligibility. See New York Dept. of Soc. Services v. Dublino
    Search
  22. Stat. 273. In Philbrook v. Glodgett
    Search
  23. result in disqualification for unemployment compensation under the State's unemployment compensation law. In Davidson v. Francis
    Search
  24. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Attorney General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act 30 n. 3 (1947). See United States v. Mersky
    Search
  25. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Scarlett
    Search
  26. as the timing and consistency of the agency's position, and the nature of its expertise. See General Electric Co. v. Gilbert
    Search
  27. Skidmore v. Swift
    Search
  28. E), (F), was available in this case. See Camp v. Pitts
    Search
  29. Dept. of HEW, Social Security Programs in the United States 54 (1971). See also Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search
  30. unemployed father have a substantial connection with the workforce and that he actively seek employment. See Philbrook v. Glodgett
    Search
  31. U.S. Supreme Court Batterton v. Francis
    Search
  32. See Burns v. Alcala
    Search
  33. See Carleson v. Remillard
    Search
  34. AFDC. See Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search
  35. See Philbrook v. Glodgett
    Search
  36. Francis v. Davidson
    Search
  37. Bethea v. Mason
    Search
  38. Social Security Board v. Nierotko
    Search
  39. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. United
    Search
  40. the Secretary. Macias v. Finch
    Search
  41. See New York Dept. of Soc. Services v. Dublino
    Search
  42. In Philbrook v. Glodgett
    Search
  43. In Davidson v. Francis
    Search
  44. See United States v. Mersky
    Search
  45. See General Electric Co. v. Gilbert
    Search
  46. See Camp v. Pitts
    Search
  47. Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe
    Search
  48. Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial