Since the attack upon the state statute is based on the supremacy clause, a three-judge court is not required. 1944) and it appears that the amount in controversy is in excess of $10,000. Board of Levee Com'rs, 142 F.2d 750 (5th Cir. Wayzata State Bank, 397 F.2d 124 (8th Cir. The action arises under the laws of the United States Shulthis v. Plaintiff claims that since defendants' actions have been taken in reliance upon state law, this state law, insofar as it is in conflict with the provisions of the Social Security Act, must fall, under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. It is plaintiff's position that defendants' refusal to pay either the "reasonable costs" or "reasonable charges" of providing public assistance under Title XIX constitutes a violation of, inter alia, 42 U.S.C. 2" Plaintiff alleges that as a result of defendants' actions it has suffered irreparable injury and has been forced to withdraw from the Title XIX program effective April 1, 1972. 1" This freeze has been imposed in an apparent attempt to keep from exceeding the amount appropriated for the Medicaid program by the state legislature. It further appears that defendants, without the prior approval of HEW, have imposed a "freeze" upon the rates of payment to those facilities providing care to the public assistance beneficiaries under the program. § 1396a(b).Īlthough the state plan provides for payments to those supplying skilled nursing home services based upon the "reasonable costs" of these services as this is defined in the plan, it appears that defendants have not made such payments to plaintiff. This plan has been approved by HEW under 42 U.S.C. The State of Minnesota participates in the program and has submitted a state plan to the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare as required by 42 U.S.C. Plaintiff is a skilled nursing home operating within the Medicaid program of Title XIX of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. The facts bearing on plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction are for the most part uncontroverted. Plaintiff seeks damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief. §§ 2201 & 2202 with jurisdiction based upon 28 U.S.C. These issues concern subject matter jurisdiction, standing of the plaintiff to bring the action, and the propriety of a preliminary injunction. Three issues are before the court at this time.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |