Case: Harris v. Eggleston

1:02-cv-02498 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: April 1, 2002

Closed Date: Dec. 27, 2009

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

According to a news report, in 2002, Urban Justice Center lawyers discovered that the New York City Human Resources Administration (HRA) was illegally terminating the food stamp benefits of thousands of low-income people with disabilities. The discovery led to the April 1, 2002, filing, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, of a civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by four named plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly-situated persons, al…

According to a news report, in 2002, Urban Justice Center lawyers discovered that the New York City Human Resources Administration (HRA) was illegally terminating the food stamp benefits of thousands of low-income people with disabilities. The discovery led to the April 1, 2002, filing, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, of a civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by four named plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly-situated persons, all of whom were represented by attorneys from private firms and the Urban Justice Center. The defendants named were officials of the HRA and the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (OTDA). According to the complaint, despite years of warnings from the United States Department of Agriculture ("USDA"), which administers the Food Stamp program, the city's HRA and the state's OTDA employed a computer program that automatically terminated the food stamps of public assistance/welfare recipients when they were approved for SSI (supplemental security income), the federal benefit for people who are poor and severely disabled. The plaintiffs alleged that the terminated SSI recipients, however, were "categorically eligible" to receive food stamps under the Food Stamps Act and should not have been terminated from receiving this public benefit. The complaint alleged that the defendants' conduct violated: 1) the Food Stamps Act ("FSA"), 7 U.S.C.A. §§ 2011, 2014, 2015, and 2020, and implementing federal and state regulations; 2) the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 et seq. and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.; and 3) the due process and equal protection clauses of the New York constitution and of the federal constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, as well as other state law provisions. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, class certification, and an award of attorneys' fees and costs.

Over the ensuing months, discovery, confidentiality of records litigation, and conferences to update the court on the status of the litigation and settlement prospects occurred. In February 2006, a defendant filed an answer to the complaint. In an unpublished order the next month, Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox set a discovery cut-off date for September 21, 2006. The case's docket sheet reflects that settlement talks had been proceeding among the parties, as had been a review by the USDA of aspects of the dispute, resulting in extension of the discovery cut-off date. Subsequently, District Judge Richard M. Berman issued an unpublished order on February 7, 2007, discontinuing the action, subject to its restoration upon application of a party.

By May 25, 2007, plaintiffs' counsel advised that the action should be restored for the limited purpose of approving and implementing a settlement. Settlement documents were submitted to the court and its preliminary approval of a class certification and of the settlement followed, in July 2007. Final approval awaited a fairness hearing the judge set for September 27, 2007. On that day, Judge Berman issued the court's judgment approving the class action settlement that had been negotiated.

The settlement agreement noted that the city and state defendants had modified their prior practices, including the computerized welfare management system, so that automatic termination of food stamp benefits should no longer occur simply because a class member began receiving SSI benefits, after having had public assistance benefits terminated. Staff and administrative law judges, likewise, had been advised of this change in practice, according to the settlement document. The settlement obligated the state defendant (the OTDA) to write to the USDA seeking its' acquiescence to the terms of the stipulation. Without that acquiescence, the defendants had no obligations under the settlement. Absent USDA acquiescence within seven months of the stipulation, the parties would again meet to determine how to resolve the case, including by trial.

The stipulation reflected that the parties had agreed upon a class certification to include "all residents of New York City who are: (1) SSI recipients living alone; or (2) SSI couples; or (3) SSI recipients living with others, described in ...[other portions of the stipulation], whose public assistance Food Stamps have been or will be discontinued by City defendant between April I, 1999 and the expiration date of this agreement due to receipt of SSI without making a separate determination of eligibility for non-public assistance food stamps." The settlement obligated the state to identify households eligible to receive food stamp benefits that had been wrongly denied them during the relevant period and, within 12 months, to perform a mass re-budgeting to restore the benefits to these households. The settlement set out details of this process and complexities of eligibility levels, as well as the notice obligations the settlement imposed upon the defendants to alert food stamps recipients of the settlement's terms. The city defendant had monitoring and tracking duties under the terms of the settlement, which described that court jurisdiction would terminate at the end of twenty-seven months from the court judgment adopting the settlement' terms, unless enforcement actions modified that period. Under the settlement, plaintiffs' attorneys were to receive payments for fees and costs from the state defendant in the aggregate amount of $117,500 and from the city defendant in the aggregate amount of $120,000.

The docket does not show subsequent activity, but according to a New York Times article (Leslie Kaufman, A Surprise Bounty, Provided by a Food Stamp Lawsuit, in New York Times, Nov. 26, 2008) it took a year for the Department of Agriculture to approve the settlement, and the resulting awards totaled $12 million, distributed to nearly 9,500 households in the five boroughs in the form of credits to electronic benefit cards, to be used for food. The credits were capped at 21 months of benefits; the 18 largest reimbursements just top $5,000, and most plaintiffs received far less.

The awards began to be distributed in October 2008.

Summary Authors

Mike Fagan (6/24/2008)

People


Judge(s)

Berman, Richard M. (New York)

Fox, Kevin N. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Dobbins, David F. Sr. (New York)

Leinhard, William (New York)

Olanoff, Oliver Michael (New York)

Rosenthal, Erica Kart (New York)

Walden, James (New York)

Weigel, Robert L. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Cardozo, Michael A. (New York)

Conway, Kimberly (New York)

Judge(s)

Berman, Richard M. (New York)

Fox, Kevin N. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Dobbins, David F. Sr. (New York)

Leinhard, William (New York)

Olanoff, Oliver Michael (New York)

Rosenthal, Erica Kart (New York)

Walden, James (New York)

Weigel, Robert L. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Cardozo, Michael A. (New York)

Conway, Kimberly (New York)

Kraft, Robert Lewis (New York)

Spitzer, Eliot (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:02-cv-02498

Docket [PACER]

Oct. 9, 2007

Oct. 9, 2007

Docket
1

1:02-cv-02498

Class Action Complaint

April 1, 2002

April 1, 2002

Complaint
53

1:02-cv-02498

Stipulation of Settlement and Order

Oct. 9, 2007

Oct. 9, 2007

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated June 9, 2022, 3:09 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT filed. Summons issued and Notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). FILING FEE $ 150.00 RECEIPT # 434725. (dle) (Entered: 04/04/2002)

April 1, 2002

April 1, 2002

CASE REFERRED TO Judge William H. Pauley as possibly related to 1:98cv887. (dle) (Entered: 04/04/2002)

April 1, 2002

April 1, 2002

2

Notice of Case Assignment to Judge Richard M. Berman . Copy of notice and judge's rules mailed to Attorney(s) of record: David F. Dobbins . (dle) (Entered: 04/04/2002)

April 3, 2002

April 3, 2002

Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox is so designated. (dle) (Entered: 04/04/2002)

April 3, 2002

April 3, 2002

Case referred as related to 98cv887 and declined by Judge William H. Pauley and returned to wheel for assignment. (dle) (Entered: 04/04/2002)

April 3, 2002

April 3, 2002

3

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Barbara Harris, William Brown, Barbara Marroquin, and Maria Ojeda; Show Cause Hearing set for 3:00 p.m. on 4/11/02; for preliminary injunction against defendants pursuant to Rule 65 of the FRCP . ( signed by Judge Richard M. Berman ); Copies mailed. (kw) (Entered: 04/08/2002)

April 5, 2002

April 5, 2002

MEMO−ENDORSEMENT on doc. #3; parties to "meet &confer" forthwith to pursue non−litigation resolution of all Copies mailed. (kw) (Entered: 04/08/2002)

April 5, 2002

April 5, 2002

4

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; Show Cause Hearing set for 3:00 p.m. on 4/11/02. For an order pursuant to Rule 34(b) of the FRCP should not be issued directing the parties to engage in expedited discovery . ( signed by Judge Richard M. Berman ); Copies mailed. (kw) (Entered: 04/08/2002)

April 5, 2002

April 5, 2002

MEMO−ENDORSEMENT on doc. #4; parties to meet &confer forthwith i.e. before 5 p.m. on 4/8/02 . ( signed by Judge Richard M. Berman ); Copies mailed. (kw) (Entered: 04/08/2002)

April 5, 2002

April 5, 2002

5

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of summons, class action complaint, orders to show cause, memorandums of law as to Verna Eggleston by Shaniqua Carr, process clerk on 4/3/02 . Answer due on 4/23/02 for Verna Eggleston . (yv) (Entered: 04/16/2002)

April 11, 2002

April 11, 2002

5

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Orders to Show Cause as to Verna Eggleston by Shaniqua Carr, process clerk on 4/3/02 . . (yv) (Entered: 04/16/2002)

April 11, 2002

April 11, 2002

5

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of summons, class action complaint, orders to show cause and memorandums in support of motions as to Brian J. Wing by Stephanie M. Rosenberg, managing attorney and Ronald Speier, assitant counsel on 4/4/02 Answer due on 4/24/02 for Brian J. Wing (yv) Modified on 04/16/2002 (Entered: 04/16/2002)

April 11, 2002

April 11, 2002

7

Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial/After Initial Case Management Conference held by District Judge. Referred to Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ( signed by Judge Richard M. Berman ) (cd) (Entered: 05/23/2002)

May 21, 2002

May 21, 2002

8

Order referring action to the Clerk to assign the above−entitled action to mediation. All issues are eligible ( signed by Judge Richard M. Berman ) (cd) (Entered: 05/24/2002)

May 23, 2002

May 23, 2002

9

Notice of selection of mediator. (sc) (Entered: 05/31/2002)

May 31, 2002

May 31, 2002

10

ORDER, regarding the Court's decision on the controversy concerning the text of a proposed confidentiality stipulation . ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); Copies mailed. (kw) (Entered: 06/05/2002)

June 4, 2002

June 4, 2002

11

Transcript of record of proceedings before Judge Richard M. Berman for the date(s) of April 11, 2002. (jb) (Entered: 06/12/2002)

June 10, 2002

June 10, 2002

12

Memo−Endorsement on letter addressed to Magistrate Judge Fox from Megan Lewis, dated 7/1/02: The definition of "confidential information" set forth on pages one through two of this writing shall govern the disclosure of documents made by the parties to the proposed stipulation. However, the underscored word "explicitly" that appears in the last line of the first page of this writing shall be deleted from definition. The Court finds that it would be economical and efficient to have one protective order concerning confidential material govern a particular litigation. Therefore, the terms of the proposed stipulation will extend to all relevant material exchanged by the stipulation signatories. The Court commends to the parties' attention Standing Order M−10−468 of this Court, dated 10/5/01, which pertains to sealed records filed with the Clerk of Court . ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); Copies mailed. (tp) (Entered: 07/09/2002)

July 3, 2002

July 3, 2002

13

ORDER, A telephone conference shall be held on 11/12/02 at 12:30 p.m. The telephone conference shall be initiated by plaintiffs' counsel to (212) 805−6705. Any request for adjournment of the conference must be made in writing, at least 48 hours before the scheduled conference and must indicate alternative dates. ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); Copies mailed by Chambers. (sb) (Entered: 11/04/2002)

Oct. 31, 2002

Oct. 31, 2002

Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox. (kw) (Entered: 12/09/2002)

Nov. 14, 2002

Nov. 14, 2002

14

ORDER, On or before 11/21/02, plaintiffs shall serve and file any motion to compel disclosure; on or before 12/3/02, the State defendant shall serve and file a response to the motion; and on or before 12/11/02, plaintiffs shall serve and file any reply. ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); Copies faxed by Chambers. (sb) (Entered: 11/19/2002)

Nov. 18, 2002

Nov. 18, 2002

15

Memo−Endorsement on letter addressed to Magistrate Judge Fox from Megan Lewis, dated 11/21/02. Re:, granting counsel for plaintiffs request to withdraw their request to file a motion to compel, without prejudice to our ability to renew our request should plaintiffs decide that is necessary . ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); (dle) (Entered: 11/26/2002)

Nov. 22, 2002

Nov. 22, 2002

16

Memorandum to Docket Clerk:, that a telephone conference was held before Judge Berman on 12/30/02 . (pl) (Entered: 12/31/2002)

Dec. 30, 2002

Dec. 30, 2002

Telephone Conference held before Judge Richard M. Berman . (pl) (Entered: 12/31/2002)

Dec. 30, 2002

Dec. 30, 2002

Telephone Conference set at 9:30 1/30/03 before Judge Richard M. Berman . (pl) (Entered: 12/31/2002)

Dec. 30, 2002

Dec. 30, 2002

18

ORDER, reset telephone conference for 11:00 a.m. on 6/24/03 . ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); Copies mailed by chambers. (kw) (Entered: 06/16/2003)

June 13, 2003

June 13, 2003

Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox. (kw) (Entered: 07/03/2003)

June 24, 2003

June 24, 2003

19

ORDER; that counsel to the plaintiff shall advise the undersinged, in writing when the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture has completed its review . ( signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox ); (pl) (Entered: 06/30/2003)

June 26, 2003

June 26, 2003

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox : Status Conference held on 5/13/2004. (kw, ) (Entered: 05/21/2004)

May 13, 2004

May 13, 2004

20

NOTICE of Appearance by Robert Lewis Kraft on behalf of Brian J. Wing (nite dep. box)(pa, ) (Entered: 05/18/2004)

May 17, 2004

May 17, 2004

21

ORDER; that the parties shall advise the undersigned in a joint writing, of the status of this action on or before 7/13/04. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 5/20/04) Copies faxed by chambers.(pl, ) (Entered: 05/25/2004)

May 21, 2004

May 21, 2004

22

ORDER: the parties shall advise the Court in a joint writing of the status of this action by 7/13/04. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 5/20/04) (kw, ) (Entered: 06/02/2004)

June 1, 2004

June 1, 2004

23

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Fox from Robert L. Kraft dated 6/29/05 re: response to the Court's request for a status report. The parties shall, on or before, 9/30/2005, provide the Court a written status report concerning this action (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 7/1/05) (yv, ) (Entered: 07/11/2005)

July 8, 2005

July 8, 2005

24

ENDORSED LETTER: addressed to Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox from Robert L. Kraft. ENDORSEMENT: On or before November 30, 2005 the parties shall provide the Court with a written status report concerning this action. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 10/6/2005) (lb, ) (Entered: 10/11/2005)

Oct. 7, 2005

Oct. 7, 2005

25

ORDER: Telephone Conference set for 1/11/2006 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox. The telephonic conference shall be initiated by counsel to the plaintiffs to (212)805−6705. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 12/13/2005) Copies Faxed By Chambers.(lb, ) (Entered: 12/14/2005)

Dec. 14, 2005

Dec. 14, 2005

26

ORDER: It is hereby ordered that, on or before 2/17/20006, the parties shall advise the Court, in writing, whether the litigation has been resolved. If not, on or before 2/24/2006, the defendants shall serve and file their answer. Thereafter, a schedule will be fixed for the parties to complete all activities necessary for them to proceed to trial. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 1/12/2006) (lb, ) (Entered: 01/17/2006)

Jan. 12, 2006

Jan. 12, 2006

27

ORDER the application for an enlargement of time made by the defendants, in a writing dated February 21,2006, is denied. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 2/21/2006) (jmi, ) (Entered: 02/24/2006)

Feb. 23, 2006

Feb. 23, 2006

28

ANSWER to Complaint. Document filed by Verna Eggleston.(dle, ) (Entered: 02/28/2006)

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

29

ANSWER to Complaint. Document filed by Verna Eggleston, Brian J. Wing.(dle, ) (Entered: 02/28/2006)

Feb. 24, 2006

Feb. 24, 2006

30

ORDER; a telephonic conference will be held in the above−captioned action on March 21, 2006 at 4:00 p.m. The telephonic conference shall be initiated by counsel to the plaintiffs to (212) 805−6705. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 3/17/06) (djc, ) (Entered: 03/22/2006)

March 21, 2006

March 21, 2006

31

ORDER that all discovery of whatever nature shall be initiated so as to be completed on or before 9/21/06; a telephonic status conference will be held with the parties on 7/6/06 at 2:00 p.m.;counsel to the plaintiffs shall initiate the telephonic conference on that date. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 3/21/06) (dle, ) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 22, 2006

March 22, 2006

Set Deadlines/Hearings: Discovery due by 9/21/2006. Telephone Conference set for 7/6/2006 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox. (dle, ) (Entered: 03/23/2006)

March 22, 2006

March 22, 2006

32

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Kevin N. Fox from Kimberly Conway dated 6/16/06. ENDORSEMENT: The instant application will be addressed with the parties on July 6, 2006, during the telephonic status conference. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 6/21/06) (js, ) (Entered: 06/26/2006)

June 23, 2006

June 23, 2006

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox : Telephone Conference held on 7/6/2006. (jmi, ) (Entered: 08/09/2006)

July 6, 2006

July 6, 2006

33

ORDER: It is hereby ordered that on or before 7/20/2006, the parties shall advise the Court, in writing, of the status of the negotiations respecting a resolution of the controversy surrounding the payment of attorney's fees. The request made to the Court that discovery be stayed, is denied. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 7/10/2006) Copies Faxed By Chambers.(lb, ) (Entered: 07/11/2006)

July 10, 2006

July 10, 2006

34

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Mag. Judge Kevin N. Fox from Elissa Rossi dated 8/2/06 re: The parties shall suspend their discovery activities until 10/2/06. The parties are to request that USDA complete its review reasonably so as to avoid any need by the parties to make an additional requests of this ilk.. (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 8/4/06) (pl, ) (Entered: 08/07/2006)

Aug. 4, 2006

Aug. 4, 2006

35

ORDER Telephone Conference set for 11/14/2006 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox. The telephonic conference shall be initiated by counsel to the plaintiffs to (212)805−6705. So Ordered (Signed by Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 11/3/2006) (jmi, ) (Entered: 11/06/2006)

Nov. 3, 2006

Nov. 3, 2006

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox : Telephone Status Conference held on 11/14/2006. (jar, ) (Entered: 12/06/2006)

Nov. 14, 2006

Nov. 14, 2006

36

ORDER: by 12/18/06, parties shall submit to the Court, for its review, their joint pre−trial order. That document must conform to the requirements for such an order that are set forth in the Individual Rules off Practice of the assigned district judge. (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 11/14/06) Copies Faxed by Chambers.(db, ) (Entered: 11/16/2006)

Nov. 15, 2006

Nov. 15, 2006

Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Pretrial Order due by 12/18/2006. (db, ) (Entered: 11/16/2006)

Nov. 15, 2006

Nov. 15, 2006

37

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox from Robert Kraft dated 12/18/06 re: counsel for dfts request the court to schedule a status conference. Document filed by Verna Eggleston, Brian J. Wing.(dle, ) (Entered: 12/22/2006)

Dec. 19, 2006

Dec. 19, 2006

38

ORDER OF DISCONTINUANCE: It is hereby ordered that the above entitled action be, and the same hereby is, discontinued provided, however, that within 45 days of the date of this order, counsel for plaintiffs and/or Defendants may upon good cause shown apply by letter for restoration of the action. (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 2/7/07) (js) (Entered: 02/08/2007)

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

39

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Richard M. Berman from Jim Walden dated 2/14/07 re: counsel for plaintiffs request that the court enter a slightly modified order for the reasons set forth herein. Plaintiffs' objection to the Mag. Judge's discovery ruling is denied (as moot) but without prejudice during any subsequent proceeding in tis case.. (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 2/15/07) (dle) (Entered: 02/20/2007)

Feb. 15, 2007

Feb. 15, 2007

42

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Berman from Jim Walden dated 3/19/07 re request that the court extend its deadline for restoration of the action for an additional 60 days: application granted (but its still unclear to me why it's needed in this 2002 case.) (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 3/19/07) (cd) (Entered: 03/21/2007)

March 20, 2007

March 20, 2007

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Richard M. Berman : Settlement Conference held on 6/12/2007. Motions due by 7/26/2007., Settlement Conference set for 7/12/2007 at 09:30 AM − 30 day conf. for prelim. approval of settlement., Fairness Hearing set for 9/27/07 at 9:30am before Judge Richard M. Berman. (tro) (Entered: 06/14/2007)

June 12, 2007

June 12, 2007

44

PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND PRELIMINARY Approve of Class Action Settlement.(Return Date set for 9/27/2007 at 09:30 AM.), MOTION to Certify Class. Document filed by Barbara Harris, William Brown, Barbara Marroquin, Maria Ojeda.(mbe) (Entered: 07/12/2007)

July 11, 2007

July 11, 2007

45

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support of re: 44 PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION Approve of Class Action Settlement. MOTION to Certify Class. Document filed by Barbara Harris, William Brown, Barbara Marroquin, Maria Ojeda. (mbe) (Entered: 07/12/2007)

July 11, 2007

July 11, 2007

46

DECLARATION of Oliver M. Olanoff in Support re: 44 PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND PRELIMINARY Approve of Class Action Settlement. MOTION to Certify Class. Document filed by Barbara Harris, William Brown, Barbara Marroquin, Maria Ojeda. (mbe) (Entered: 07/12/2007)

July 11, 2007

July 11, 2007

47

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Support, Notice of Motion for Class Certification served on Robert L. Kraft, Kimberly Conway on 7/10/07. Service was made by Mail. Document filed by Barbara Harris, William Brown, Barbara Marroquin, Maria Ojeda. (tro) (Entered: 07/13/2007)

July 11, 2007

July 11, 2007

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Richard M. Berman : Pretrial Conference for preliminary approval of settlement held on 7/12/07. Order signed. (kco) (Entered: 07/31/2007)

July 12, 2007

July 12, 2007

48

ORDER PRELIMINARILY CERTIFYING CLASS AND PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS; for the purpose of settlement, the action is preliminarily certified as a class action on behalf of the following persons as stated in this order. Barbara Harris and Barbara Marroquin are preliminarily certified as representatives of the class. The terms of the settlement are hereby preliminarily approved. A Fairness hearing shall be held on 9/27/2007at 9:30 AM before the Honorable Richard M. Berman.(Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 7/12/07) (kco) (Entered: 07/17/2007)

July 13, 2007

July 13, 2007

49

TRANSCRIPT of proceedings held on 6/12/07 before Judge Richard M. Berman. (jbe) (Entered: 07/25/2007)

July 25, 2007

July 25, 2007

50

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Richard M. Berman from Jim Walden dated 7/26/07 re: Request that the Court approve the proposed form of notice and the Proposed Notice enclosed herein as Exhibits A and C to the proposed order. ENDORSEMENT: The Court is directing counsel to meet and confer and submit a joint notice by noon on 7/31/07. Counsels' inability to resolve open issues jointly and professionally is becoming a little tedious and has hampered timely resolution on behalf of the class. (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 7/30/07) (cd). (Entered: 07/31/2007)

July 30, 2007

July 30, 2007

51

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Richard M. Berman from Robert L. Weigel dated 8/7/2007 re: request that the Court approve the Settlement as negotiated by the parties. ENDORSEMENT: The Court approves the proposed settlement preliminarily (with the notice language changes submitted) and is moving forward to the fairness hearing. (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 8/9/2007) (jar) (Entered: 08/13/2007)

Aug. 10, 2007

Aug. 10, 2007

53

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT AND ORDER Defendants will perform the acts described in this Stipulation if the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture ("Secretary") formally acquiesces to the terms of this Stipulation based on the Secretary's authority under 7 U.S.C. § 2022(a) "to determine the amount of and settle and adjust my claim... arising under the provisions of this act or the regulations issued pursuant to this act...." Within ten (1 0) business days of the execution of this Stipulation, but prior to the submission of this Stipulation to the Court, State defendant will provide all counsel with a draft letter to the Department of Agriculture requesting the Secretary to acquiesce to the terms of this Stipulation. Said letter will, in addition to seeking acquiescence, request that all communications from the Department of Agriculture concerning said request, including but not limited to communications raising my questions concerning the stipulation, be made in writing. In addition State defendant agrees that all communication from State defendant to the Secretary shall be in writing. Plaintiff counsel will have ten (10) business days to provide any comments to State defendant on the contents of the letter seeking acquiescence, and State defendant will consider all comments raised by Plaintiffs' counsel. State defendant will subsequently submit a copy of the Stipulation and a letter to the Department of Agriculture requesting the Secretary to acquiesce to the terms of this Stipulation. State defendant will provide all counsel with copies of all correspondence and documents sent between the Secretary and State defendant concerning this request. for acquiescence. State defendant will allow ail parties five (5) business days to comment on any communications from the Secretary prior to submitting a written response to the written communication from the Secretary and will consider such comments in drafting any response. (Signed by Judge Richard M. Berman on 10/9/2007) (jmi) (Entered: 10/10/2007)

Oct. 9, 2007

Oct. 9, 2007

Case Details

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Public Benefits/Government Services

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 1, 2002

Closing Date: Dec. 27, 2009

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Adult receiptents of SSI who formerly received public assistance from New York City and who had those benefits terminated

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State of New York Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (New York), City

City of New York Human Resources Administration (New York), City

Case Details

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 2007 - None

Issues

Benefit Source:

Food stamps

SSI