CT DSS v. Leavitt
No. 399CV2020(SRU) (D. Conn.), filed October 18, 1999

At issue in this case is whether the Department of Health and Human Services (via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) violates the Medicare statute and due process clause by allowing a fiscal intermediary, United Government Services (UGS), to fail to provide written initial determinations, timely initial determinations and reconsiderations, and correct decisions to dual beneficiaries in Connecticut receiving home health care.
Last Update: August 25, 2006
 

Erb v. McClellan
No. 2:05-cv-6201 (E.D.Pa.), filed November 30, 2005

At issue in this case is whether CMS' implementation of so-called "passive enrollment" into a Medicare managed care plan for over 110,000 dual eligibles in Pennsylvania, without prior notice and publication, violates the Medicare statute, especially the Medicare Modernization Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Due Process Clause.
Last Update: August 25, 2006
 

Erringer v. Thompson
No. CIV01-112TUC-BPV (D. Ariz.), filed March 16, 2001

At issue in this case is whether the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service's procedures for promulgating Local Coverage Determinations (LCDs) and for informing beneficiaries of the application of LCDs to their claims violates the APA, the Medicare statute and regulations, and the due process clause.
Last Update: December 15, 2004
 

Gray Panthers Project Fund v. Thompson
No. 1:01CV01374(HHK)(D.D.C.), filed June 22, 2000

At issue in this case is whether the Secretary of Health and Human Services could dispense with the statutory deadline for MCOs to submit information about their plans for the upcoming year and the Secretary could refuse to mail comparative written information about plans to beneficiaries, again as required by the statute.  
Last Update: December 15, 2004
 

Grijalva v. Shalala
No. CIV 93-7112 TUC ACM (D. Ariz.), filed 1993;
Grijalva v. Shalala, No. 97-15877 (9th Cir.), appeal filed by defendant 1997;
Shalala v. Grijalva, No. 98-1284 (S.Ct.), petition for cert. filed by defendant

At issue in this case is whether the Secretary of HHS failed to ensure that HMOs provided appropriate notice and hearing rights to patients whose services were cut back or terminated.
Last Update: October 30, 2005
 

Guzzo v. Thompson - Amicus Curaie Activity
No. 03-1346 (6th Cir.), appeal filed March 6, 2003

At issue in this case are whether a beneficiary could only review a national coverage determination (NCD) based on evidence available at the time that it was adopted, as opposed to at the time of the beneficiary's claim, and whether an NCD that was changed while the beneficiary's administrative claim was pending (but after the surgery had been performed) should be applied retroactively to authorize Medicare coverage.
Last Update: July 15, 2004
 

Harris v. Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles
No. CV 03 2008FMC(PJWx) (C.D.Cal.), filed March 12, 2003

At issue in this case is whether the County of Los Angeles, under state law and the Medicare and Medicaid statutes, may close a rehabilitation hospital and eliminate 100 beds from another public hospital.
Last Update: August 25, 2006
 

Healey v. Leavitt
No. 398CV00418 DJS (D.Conn.), filed March 4, 1998

At issue in this case is whether the Secretary of Health and Human Services failed to ensure that home health agencies provided sufficient notice and hearing rights to home health patients whose services were cut back or terminated.
Last Update: September 21, 2007
 

Lirot v. Leavitt
No. 3:05CV824(RNC) (D.Conn.), filed May 24, 2005

At issue in this case is whether the Secretary=s regulation, effective May 1, 2005, that prohibits Medicare contractors from sending copies of the notice of initial determination to the beneficiary=s appointed representative violates the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the Medicare statute, was promulgated arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of another provision of the APA, and violates the Due Process Clause.
Last Update: August 25, 2006
 

Lormore v. Shalala
No. 3:00CV563(AVC), filed March 24, 2000

At issue in this case were: (1) whether a four-day stay in a hospital can be considered Aoutpatient observation@ status and thus preclude meeting the 3-day qualifying condition for post-hospital skilled nursing facility care; (2) whether a hospital=s refusal to submit a Part A claim, and thus to keep the plaintiff out of the administrative process, violates the Medicare statute and regulations; and (3) whether the notices provided by the hospital were sufficient.
Last Update: April 19, 2001

Martinez v. Thompson
No. 8900-M Civil (D.N.M.) Original Case Filed In 1970, Petition To Enforce Filed May 3, 2001

At issue in this case is whether the failure of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, through the intermediary responsible for New Mexico, to provide a pre-deprivation hearing to a New Mexico home health beneficiary, violated a previous court order.
Last Update: December 15, 2004
 

National Senior Citizens Law Center v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
No. 1:04CV00226 (D.D.C.), filed Feb. 12, 2004

At issue in this case is whether the Department of Health and Human Services must produce documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act on the Secretary's new feeding assistant policy and regulation that took effect in October 2003.
Final Update: July 15, 2004
 

Resident Councils of Washington v. Leavitt
No. CV04-1691 (W.D. Wash.), filed July 30, 2004

At issue in this case is the legality of regulations issued in 2003 that permit states to allows nursing facilities to employ feeding assistants with only eight hours of training.
Last Update: January 3, 2008
 

Richey v. Shalala
No. W00CA025 (W.D.Tex.), filed February 1, 2000

At issue in this case was whether the defendant=s failure to cover lung volume reduction surgery under the Medicare program violates Medicare and APA requirements.
Last Update: May 3, 2001
 

Texas Gray Panthers v. Thompson
No. 1: 99CV01557 (D.D.C.), filed June 16, 1999;
In re Texas Gray Panthers, No. 01-5095 (D.C.Cir.), filed March 26, 2001.

At issue in this case is whether the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Commissioner of the Social Security Agency failed to implement various provisions of the Medicare statute which would require states to enroll certain low-income Medicare-eligible beneficiaries in so-called "buy-in programs" under which, depending on the program, premiums, part of premiums, and other out-of-pocket Medicare expenses would be paid for by state Medicaid programs.
Last Update: September 19, 2005
 

Wallis v. Thompson
No. CIV02-448TUC(GEE)(D. Ariz.), filed September 10, 2002

At issue in this case is whether a National Coverage determination (NCD) which is changed should be applied to claims pending in the administrative process, even though the service was received before the change was made.
Last Update: May 3, 2005
 

Webber v. McClellan
No. CV05-4219-PHX-NVW (D.Ariz.), filed December 22, 2005

Weichardt v. Leavitt
No. C 03-05490 VRW (N.D.Cal.), filed December 5, 2003

At issue is Whether CMS’ promulgation of final rules not requiring timely advance written notice to hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries who are being discharged violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the Due Process Clause.
Last Update: January 3, 2008
 

Wilson-Coker v. Thompson
No. 3:00CV1312(CFD) (D.Conn.), filed July 14, 2000

At issue in this case was whether the CMS policy effected by the AWestmoreland letter@ of December 3, 1999, by which home health agencies no longer are required  to file claims for Medicare coverage in cases involving dually eligible beneficiaries and states are prohibited from recovering from providers which fail to submit claims, violates the Medicare and Medicaid statutes, the APA, and the due process clause.
Last Update: October 30, 2003