|
|
Dept. Of Inc. Maintenance v. Heckler, 471 U.S. 524 (1985)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Dept. Of Inc. Maintenance v. Heckler, 471 U.S. 524 (1985)
Connecticut Department of Income Maintenance v. Heckler No. 83-2136 Argued March 27, 1985 Decided May 20, 1985 471 U.S. 524
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
The Medicaid Act does not cover services performed for patients between the ages of 21 and 65 in an "institution for mental diseases" (IMD). In the absence of a statutory definition, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) has promulgated a regulation defining an IMD as "an institution that is primarily engaged in providing diagnosis, treatment or care of persons with mental diseases," and providing that whether an institution is an IMD is determined by its "overall character." The Middletown Haven Rest Home in Connecticut is an "intermediate care facility" (ICF) that provides care for persons with mental illness as well as other diseases. Between January, 1977, and September, 1979, Connecticut paid Middletown Haven for services it provided to Medicaid eligible patients, including those between the ages of 21 and 65 who had been transferred there from state mental hospitals. Under the Medicaid program, the State received federal reimbursement for those payments. At the completion of an audit by the Department of Health and Human Services, the State was notified that the federal reimbursement was not allowable because Middletown Haven had been identified as an IMD. On administrative review, the Department’s Grant Appeals Board upheld the disallowance. The State then filed an action in Federal District Court, which set aside the disallowance, but the Court of Appeals reversed.
Held: An ICF may be an IMD, and the terms are not mutually exclusive. The Act’s express authorization for coverage of services performed for individuals 65 or over uses language that plainly indicates that a hospital, a skilled nursing facility, or an ICF may be an IMD. Moreover, the Secretary’s interpretation of the Act comports with the Act’s plain language. And the legislative history does not reveal any clear expression of contrary congressional intent. Pp. 528-538.
731 F.2d 1052, affirmed.
STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Dept. Of Inc. Maintenance v. Heckler, 471 U.S. 524 (1985) in 471 U.S. 524 471 U.S. 525. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=1XJFSS4G1RCDTIZ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Dept. Of Inc. Maintenance v. Heckler, 471 U.S. 524 (1985), in 471 U.S. 524, page 471 U.S. 525. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=1XJFSS4G1RCDTIZ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Dept. Of Inc. Maintenance v. Heckler, 471 U.S. 524 (1985). cited in 1985, 471 U.S. 524, pp.471 U.S. 525. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=1XJFSS4G1RCDTIZ.
|