Edward v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

536 So. 2d 1078, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2462, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4849, 1988 WL 117552
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 9, 1988
DocketNo. 88-1013
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 536 So. 2d 1078 (Edward v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Edward v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 536 So. 2d 1078, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2462, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4849, 1988 WL 117552 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final order of the Office of Public Assistance Appeal Hearings and remand for further proceedings.

It is undisputed that The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services did not possess all of the facts necessary for a determination of the appellant’s eligibility for AFDC benefits at the time of his application. Because the appellee agrees that documented or verified proof, as to the actual amount of the lump sum settlement award received by the children’s mother and as to the availability of the funds at the time of appellant’s application for benefits could result in a determination of appellant’s eligibility, or at least shorten the time of ineligibility for benefits, the final order of the client appeal hearings officer must be vacated, and a redetermination of eligibility made on the basis of evidence which substantiates the whereabouts and availability of the settlement funds. Fla. Admin.Code Ann. Rules 1001.080(8) and 1001.102(14)(d) (1987).

We therefore vacate the final order entered in this matter, and remand the case to The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services for a redetermination of appellant’s eligibility for AFDC benefits, upon the presentation of substantiated evidence as to the whereabouts and availability of the funds from the settlement award made to the children’s mother.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

LETTS and WALDEN, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., concurs specially with opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Beattie v. Beattie
536 So. 2d 1078 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
536 So. 2d 1078, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2462, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4849, 1988 WL 117552, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-v-department-of-health-rehabilitative-services-fladistctapp-1988.