"The Work Goes On, The Cause Endures, The Hope Still Lives, and the Dream Shall Never Die." T.M. Kennedy

English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish

SACRAMENTO LOAVES AND FISHES, et. al. v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, ( Sacramento Co. Case No. 06CS01024)

Sacramento County failed  to schedule expedited food stamp appointments within three days of the date of application for eligible food stamp applicants.

CASE STATUS: Petitioners filed on 7/21/2006. Petitioners are negotiating to settle this action.

HEATHCOCK, PAYCER, DIAMOND AND SHKIBERA v. ALLENBY 

( Sacramento County Case No. # 06CS00471)

Food stamp overissuance notices of action action do not include a budget calculation that tells the recipient how the overpayment is calculated. LSNC and CCWRO sent a demand letter in which the Department said that it is not their policy to require a budget calculation on the food stammp notice of action. The lawsuit was filed on March 30, 2006.

CASE STATUS: The case is settling.

PICH, ROBLES, ROWLAND, THOMAS and VAJRASKA, v WAGNER, Director, California Department of Social Services; CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; DOES 1-50. Sacramento County Case No. 07CS01306.

CCWRO co-counsels with Legal Aid Society of San Diego County, Bay Area Legal Aid, Legal Services of Northern California, Western Center on Law and Poverty and Manatt, Phelps and Phillips, LLP.

CCWRO, in concert with a number of legal services filed programs, has been monitoring and seeing systematic and repeated delays in the issuance of timely benefits to recipients in CalWIN counties. Timely issuance of benefits is not occurring when: (1) timely requests foe and administrative hearing were submitted prior to the effective date of the notice of action reducing or terminating the monthly benefits; (2) Quarterly Reports (QR7's) were submitted after the 10th day of the report month, but before the first day of the following month; (3) Quarterly Reports (QR7's) were submitted by the 10th day of the report month; (4) the parent[recipient reached the 60 month limit for receiving CalWORKs assisteance and the entire family was terminated; (5) the recipient prevailed on the claims to receive benefits but CalWIN improperly failed to issue timely benefits in compliance with hearing decisions or settlements; or (6) timely and or appropriate Cal WORKs or Food Stamp benefits were not received.

The statutes and regulations have clearly established time frames and duties that the counties must follow which the CalWIN counties are not following. 

CASE STATUS: Petitioners are currently drafting an amended petition.