SSA Stops Unlawful Suspensions Based on Outstanding Warrants

More than 200,000 people may be eligible again; $500 million in retroactive benefits available

The settlement of a class action lawsuit (Martinez v. Astrue) has ended the Social Security Administration’s policy of denying or suspending benefits for “fleeing to avoid prosecution,” based solely on the existence of an outstanding felony arrest warrant.   In addition to abandoning the illegal policy, SSA has agreed to repay more than $500 million in benefits that were unlawfully withheld from 80,000 people whose benefits have been suspended or denied since January 1, 2007.  People whose benefits were suspended or denied between 2000 and 2006 will be notified of the change in policy and given a chance to re-establish eligibility.  All told, more than 200,000 people will benefit from the settlement.  Your clients stand to benefit immensely from the Martinez settlement.  Please help us get the word out and be on the lookout for potential class members.

Learn more about Martinez v. Astrue: Recent press coverage about the Martinez settlement l Martinez Settlement Website

__________________________________________________

Should You Make a Large, Upfront Payment to Move into a Retirement Community?

Use NSCLC’s checklist to learn about retirement communities’ pros and cons.

Read More 

________________________________________________________

On August 18, 2009 several elderly plaintiffs with disabilities filed a class action lawsuit, Brantley, et al. v. Maxwell-Jolly, Director of California Department of Health Care Services, to stop devastating budget-related cuts in Adult Day Health Care (ADHC) services. On September 10, 2009 the presiding judge in the case issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the State from implementing the cuts until appropriate alternative services are provided to prevent inappropriate institutionalization. ADHC provides daytime health and nursing care, therapies and other services to low-income seniors and people with disabilities. 

The cuts, if implemented, would place as many as 8,000 recipients at immediate risk of institutionalization, hospitalization, injury or death. Among those affected is Plaintiff Lillie Brantley, who is typical of other people who receive ADHC services.  Mrs. Brantley’s grand-niece, Chauncey McLorin, says she would have to put her aunt in a nursing home if her ADHC services are cut to only three days a week.  “My Aunt Lillie has Alzheimer's disease.  She lives with me and cannot be left alone because she is not safe.  I work full-time and can’t afford to quit my job to care for her.  I love her very much but I would be forced to place her in a nursing home if she can’t go to ADHC five days a week and that would be devastating for our family.”

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in the Northern District of California, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and federal Medicaid law. The plaintiffs are represented by Disability Rights California, the National Senior Citizens Law Center, AARP Foundation Litigation, and the National Health Law Program.

Read more about the lawsuit to stop Adult Day Health Care cuts

Complaint: Brantley, et al. v. Maxwell-Jolly 

How the Sotomayor Saga Could Help Progressives Take Back the Courts

By Doug Kendall and Simon Lazarus, Originally published on the American Prospect's website

As Supreme Court experts rarely fail to point out, Sonia Sotomayor's accession to the Supreme Court this week will do little to shift future outcomes in hot button cases, because she will likely vote as did her predecessor, center-left Justice David Souter. Nevertheless, the confirmation ritual she has just completed could ultimately turn out to be a substantial plus for progressives. Her performance, and even more, statements by senators, especially Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy, could reposition progressives on and off the Court with a new vision that spotlights the Roberts Court's appetite for judicial supremacy and reactionary outcomes -- "unabashed law-making," as Justice John Paul Stevens recently put it.

Read the full article: How the Sotomayor Saga Could Help Progressives Take Back the Courts