Mathews v. Eldridge
E54707
Mathews v. Eldridge is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established a three-factor balancing test for determining what procedural safeguards due process requires in administrative proceedings.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Mathews v. Eldridge canonical | 4 |
| Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) | 1 |
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
due process case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| announcedTest | three-factor balancing test for procedural due process in administrative proceedings ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
administrative hearings
ⓘ
government benefit termination procedures ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
administrative law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ |
| balancingFactor |
the Government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that additional or substitute procedural requirements would entail
ⓘ
the private interest that will be affected by the official action ⓘ the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards ⓘ the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used ⓘ |
| citation | 424 U.S. 319 ⓘ |
| citedBy |
Goldberg v. Kelly
ⓘ
surface form:
Goldberg v. Kelly (distinguished)
|
| clarified | scope of due process protections for disability benefit recipients ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Due Process Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1976 ⓘ |
| determinedThat | written procedures and post-termination hearings could satisfy due process in disability benefit terminations ⓘ |
| distinguishedFrom | Goldberg v. Kelly ⓘ |
| established | Mathews balancing test ⓘ |
| fullName |
Mathews v. Eldridge
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
|
| holding |
Due process does not require an evidentiary hearing prior to the termination of Social Security disability benefits.
ⓘ
The adequacy of administrative procedures for due process purposes is evaluated using a three-factor balancing test. ⓘ |
| influenced | later due process jurisprudence on risk-of-error analysis ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| languageOfCase | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
administrative procedures
ⓘ
procedural due process ⓘ termination of Social Security disability benefits ⓘ |
| pageInReporter | 319 ⓘ |
| petitioner | F. David Mathews ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
cases involving government entitlements and benefits
ⓘ
procedural due process analysis in administrative benefit determinations ⓘ procedural safeguards required before deprivation of property interests ⓘ |
| recognizedInterest | property interest in continued receipt of disability benefits ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | George H. Eldridge ⓘ |
| subjectCategory |
U.S. Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court
ⓘ
U.S. Supreme Court cases on Social Security ⓘ U.S. Supreme Court cases on due process ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | termination of Social Security disability insurance benefits without a pre-termination evidentiary hearing ⓘ |
| typeOfProceeding | civil ⓘ |
| usedIn | analysis of what process is due under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments ⓘ |
| volumeInReporter | 424 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1976 ⓘ |
Referenced by (5)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)