Mathews v. Eldridge
Hearing Should Come Before Termination Of Benefits
Justices Brennan and Marshall dissented. Brennan felt that Eldridge must be given an evidentiary hearing of the type required for welfare recipients. He noted that since disability benefits are provided without a determination of need, a need is presumed. In this case, because disability benefits were terminated, the Eldridge home was foreclosed on and the family's furniture was repossessed, forcing everyone to sleep in one bed. "Finally, it is also no argument that a worker, who has been placed in the untenable position of having been denied disability benefits may still seek other forms of public assistance."
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1973 to 1980Mathews v. Eldridge - Significance, Due Process Is Flexible, Hearing Should Come Before Termination Of Benefits, Impact