Citation network
Lukhard Vs. Reed
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 22, 1987
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. 368 (1987) U.S. Supreme Court Lukhard v. ReedSearch
-
U.S. 368 (1987) Lukhard v. ReedSearch
-
income. More importantly, the AFDC statute itself contradicts respondents' contention, as is demonstrated by Heckler v. TurnerSearch
-
when determining the eligibility of families seeking Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) benefits. Reed v. HealthSearch
-
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has reached the opposite conclusion. Watkins v. BlinzingerSearch
-
cross-appealed. After the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment in all respects, Reed v. HealthSearch
-
quoting Stratton's Independence, Ltd. v. HowbertSearch
-
Doyle v. MitchellSearch
-
they often are intended in significant part to compensate for the loss of gain, e.g., lost wages. See Watkins v. BlinzingerSearch
-
Cf. Russello v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae in Lockhart v. HardenSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Thus, the Secretary's interpretation of the AFDC statute -- which is entitled to deference, see, e.g., 470 U. S. v. NaturalSearch
-
a given administrative interpretation, it means to freeze that administrative interpretation in place. See Helvering v. WilshireSearch
-
the Secretary's conclusion that Virginia's revised regulations are consistent with HHS' regulations, see, e.g., Lyng v. PayneSearch
-
Post at 481 U. S. 389 (quoting Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. LiepeltSearch
-
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
ed. and Supp. III), to assist needy children and those who care for them. Shea v. VialpandoSearch
-
Perrin v. UnitedSearch
-
Ante at 481 U. S. 375 (quoting Eisner v. MacomberSearch
-
U. S. 189 , 252 U. S. 207 (1920) (quoting Stratton's Independence, Ltd. v. HowbertSearch
-
Commissioner v. GlenshawSearch
-
Watkins v. BlinzingerSearch
-
Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. LiepeltSearch
-
case in which they are awarded, are a windfall to the plaintiff, rather than compensation. See Commissioner v. GlenshawSearch
-
AFDC statute, and so is entitled to deference. Ante at 481 U. S. 378 -379. See Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Lukhard v. ReedSearch
-
Reed v. HealthSearch
-
See Watkins v. BlinzingerSearch
-
Lockhart v. HardenSearch
-
U. S. v. NaturalSearch
-
See Helvering v. WilshireSearch
-
See Commissioner v. GlenshawSearch
-
See Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
Heckler v. TurnerSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial