Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Califano, Secretary Of Health, Education, And Welfare v. Yamasaki Et Al.

• 1978 • 442 U.S. 682 • Burger Court
In the case of Califano v. Yamasaki, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare did not have authority to recover overpayments made by Social Security without providing a hearing for recipients prior to recoupment. The court held that due process required such hearings under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause before recovery could be initiated by offsetting against future benefits or requiring repayment from other assets. Additionally, it was...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1978
Docket: 77-1511
442 U.S. 682
99 S. Ct. 2545
61 L. Ed. 2d 176
1979 U.S. LEXIS 132
Argued: Mar 19, 1979

Califano, Secretary Of Health, Education, And Welfare v. Yamasaki Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Califano v. Yamasaki, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare did not have authority to recover overpayments made by Social Security without providing a hearing for recipients prior to recoupment. The court held that due process required such hearings under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause before recovery could be initiated by offsetting against future benefits or requiring repayment from other assets. Additionally, it was determined that while there is no constitutional bar to combining claims against multiple beneficiaries into one action for administrative convenience, individual notice and opportunity for hearing must still be provided.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Califano v. Yamasaki, Justice Rehnquist argued that the majority had overstepped its bounds by mandating nationwide class action suits in cases involving Social Security benefits. He contended that such a broad ruling was unnecessary and inappropriate given the specific circumstances of this case, which involved only two district courts out of 95 across the country. Furthermore, he believed it was not within the Court's purview to dictate how lower courts should manage their dockets or handle class actions generally. Instead, these matters should be left to Congress and federal rulemakers who have more expertise in procedural issues. Finally, he expressed concern about potential negative consequences of allowing large-scale litigation against government agencies without clear legislative authorization.

Opinion written by Justice HABlackmun
Decided: Jun 20, 1979
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms