Indiana Employment Security Division v. Burney

409 U.S. 540, 93 S. Ct. 883, 35 L. Ed. 2d 62, 1973 U.S. LEXIS 117
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 5, 1973·No. 71-1119·Published·Cited by 73 cases

Opinions

[541]*541Per Curiam.

We noted probable jurisdiction in this case, 406 U. S. 956, to review the judgment of a three-judge district court, holding that Indiana’s system of administering unemployment insurance was in conflict with § 303 (a)(1) of the Social Security Act, 49 Stat. 626, as amended, 42 U. S. C. §503 (a)(1).1 Before the three-judge court entered its injunction, Indiana’s practice was to discontinue unemployment benefits upon a determination of ineligibility, that determination taking place without the benefit of a full hearing for the erstwhile beneficiary.

After several months of effort, however, the class representative in this litigation, Mrs. Burney, succeeded in obtaining a reversal of the initial determination of ineligibility.2 She has now received full retroactive compensation.

The full settlement of Mrs. Burney’s financial claim raises the question whether there continues to be a case or controversy in this lawsuit. Though the appellee purports to represent a class of all present and future recip[542]*542ients of unemployment insurance, there are no named representatives of the class except Mrs. Burney, who has been paid. Cf. Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U. S. 31, 32-33. Accordingly, the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court to consider whether it has become moot.

It is so ordered.

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

Indiana Employment Security Division v. Burney, 409 U.S. 540, 93 S. Ct. 883, 35 L. Ed. 2d 62, 1973 U.S. LEXIS 117 (1973).

409 U.S. 540 (Indiana Employment Security Division v. Burney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lightfoot v. District of Columbia
246 F.R.D. 326 (District of Columbia, 2007)
In Re Madison
184 B.R. 686 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1995)
Western Nuclear, Inc. v. Huffman
825 F.2d 1430 (Tenth Circuit, 1987)
Cleary v. Commissioner of Public Welfare
485 N.E.2d 955 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1985)
Pacific Legal Foundation v. Watt
539 F. Supp. 1194 (D. Montana, 1982)
Murphy v. Hunt
455 U.S. 478 (Supreme Court, 1982)
Princiotta v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.
532 F. Supp. 1009 (D. Massachusetts, 1982)
Alice Free v. Moon Landrieu
666 F.2d 698 (First Circuit, 1981)
East v. Pryor
89 F.R.D. 75 (E.D. Arkansas, 1981)
Vann v. Housing Authority
87 F.R.D. 642 (W.D. Missouri, 1980)
Ward v. Arkansas State Police
493 F. Supp. 1315 (E.D. Arkansas, 1980)