A.Z. v. Higher Education Student Assistance Authority
48 A.3d 1151
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2012Background
- AZ, US citizen, NJ resident since 1997, seeks TAG for college in NJ.
- Her mother is an undocumented immigrant; father not involved.
- AZ's FAFSA used mother's ITIN; mother not NJ resident for purposes of TAG.
- HESAA denied TAG, citing mother’s lack of legal NJ residency and a regulatory definition tying student residence to parent domicile.
- Agency relied on N.J.A.C. 9A:9-2.2 and asserted dependence on parent’s domicile for student residency.
- Court reverses, finding statutory residency/domicile independent of parent status and voids the 2005 regulation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether AZ qualifies under N.J.S.A. 18A:71B-2(b)-(c) given residency and citizenship. | AZ meets residency and citizenship. | HESAA requires parent domicile for residency; relies on regulation. | AZ qualifies; regulation misapplies the statute. |
| Whether HESAA may treat dependent student’s residence as the parent’s domicile via N.J.A.C. 9A:9-2.2. | Regulation improperly ties student residence to parent domicile. | Regulation supports parent-domicile rule for dependents. | Regulation void; student residency may diverge from parent domicile. |
| Whether HESAA’s interpretation undermines statutory purpose of TAG as a student entitlement. | TAG is to the student based on need and residency; no automatic parent-benefit. | Aid functionally benefits parents by reducing costs. | Agency interpretation improper; AZ is intended TAG recipient. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shim v. Rutgers, The State Univ. of N.J., 191 N.J. 374 (2007) (rejects rigid dependency-based domicile; supports student residency autonomy)
- In re N.J. Individual Health Coverage Program’s Readoption of N.J.A.C. 11:20-1 et seq., 179 N.J. 570 (2004) (regulatory reach must align with statutory terms)
- Mayflower Sec. Co. v. Bureau of Sec., 64 N.J. 85 (1973) (statutory interpretation not always deferential to agency)
- Randolph Town Ctr., L.P. v. Cnty. of Morris, 186 N.J. 78 (2006) (court may review agency’s statutory interpretation independently)
- Pascale v. Pascale, 140 N.J. 583 (1995) (child’s right to support analogy to TAG)
- Caballero v. Martinez, 186 N.J. 548 (2006) (immigration status does not preclude domicile determination in state law)