Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Perales v. United States

Perales v. United States, 751 F.2d 95 (2d Cir. 1984)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1984-12-18
Topic: litigation

PER CURIAM: The United States appeals from that portion of Judge Brieant’s order, 598 F.Supp. 19, granting summary judgment and holding that the Department of Agriculture is not authorized to charge interest on debts arising out of the Food Stamp Program, 7 U.S.C. § 2011 to 7 U.S.C. § 2029 (1982), due it from the Department of Social Services of the State of New York. We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Perales v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 6 opinions

PERALES v. UNITED STATES,751 F.2d 95(2nd Cir. 1984)

CESAR A. PERALES, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND JOHN R. BLOCK,

SECRETARY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

No. 427, Docket 84-6249.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued November 30, 1984.

Decided December 18, 1984.

Page 96

Daniel D. Kaplan, Asst. Atty. Gen., New York City (Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen., of the State of New York, Paul M. Glickman, Asst. Atty. Gen., New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.

Richard A. Simpson, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City (Rudolph Giuliani, U.S. Atty., for the S.D.N.Y., Thomas D. Warren, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City, of counsel), for defendants-appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Before LUMBARD, WINTER and PRATT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[1] The United States appeals from that portion of Judge Brieant's order, 598 F.Supp. 19, granting summary judgment and holding that the Department of Agriculture is not authorized to charge interest on debts arising out of the Food Stamp Program,7 U.S.C. § 2011to7 U.S.C. § 2029(1982), due it from the Department of Social Services of the State of New York.

[2] We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in the district court's opinion.