Kawran Bazar, Inc. v. United States
17-61-cv
| 2d Cir. | Dec 20, 2017Background
- Kawran Bazar, Inc., a Queens grocery serving Bangladeshi/Muslim customers, was disqualified from WIC for a pattern of violations and received a six-year WIC disqualification in 2012, upheld on administrative review in 2014.
- Under FNS regulation, a WIC disqualification triggers a reciprocal SNAP disqualification of the same length and not subject to review, but FNS may impose a civil money penalty (CMP) in lieu of disqualification under a hardship exception when no other nearby store sells a comparable variety of staple foods at comparable prices.
- FNS notified Kawran in August 2015 that it would be disqualified from SNAP for six years and considered but rejected Kawran’s claim to the hardship CMP because other authorized stores within a one-mile radius sold a similar variety at comparable prices.
- Kawran administratively challenged only the hardship-exception denial; the agency sustained the SNAP disqualification on September 25, 2015.
- Kawran sued under 7 U.S.C. § 2023(a)(13) in Eastern District of New York; the district court granted summary judgment for the government on December 13, 2016. Kawran appealed to the Second Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FNS’s denial of the hardship CMP was arbitrary or capricious | Kawran: halal and ethnically specific staple foods make it unique; no nearby store sells halal/Bangladeshi staples at comparable prices, so hardship exception applies | Government: investigator evidence showed other nearby authorized stores (within one mile) sold similar staple variety, including halal items, at comparable prices | Court affirmed: agency decision was not arbitrary or capricious; evidence supported ineligibility for hardship exception |
Key Cases Cited
- Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux N. Am., Inc., 715 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2013) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Willy's Grocery v. United States, 656 F.2d 24 (2d Cir. 1981) (SNAP sanction review: arbitrary or capricious standard)
- Cross v. United States, 512 F.2d 1212 (4th Cir. 1975) (en banc) (definition of arbitrary or capricious review)
- Lawrence v. United States, 693 F.2d 274 (2d Cir. 1982) (agency adherence to settled policy supports sanction)
- Young Jin Choi v. United States, 944 F. Supp. 323 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (upholding disqualification where nearby stores accepted SNAP)
- Varnadore v. United States, 785 F. Supp. 550 (D.S.C. 1991) (rejecting hardship where an authorized store selling broader staples was nearby)