Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Rizzi v. Shalala
No. 5:88CV00360 (TFGD) (D. Conn. Sept. 29, 1994) ; Clearinghouse Number: 45070
Description
Revised Home Health Guidelines Render Medicare Beneficiaries’ Claims Moot
Abstract
The district court has granted defendant HHS’s motion for
summary judgment in this action challenging defendant’s
policy of denying Medicare coverage for home health care services
on the grounds that the patient’s medical condition is
classified as "chronic" or "stable."
Plaintiffs, Medicare beneficiaries faced with the loss of home
health benefits, argued that defendant’s policy violated
Title XVIII of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395
et seq. After plaintiffs’ complaint was filed, HHS changed
its policy in response to the court’s decision in Duggan v.
Bowen, 691 F. Supp. 1487 (D.D.C. 1988) (Clearinghouse No. 42,167).
The revised policy, articulated in HCFA’s Intermediary Manual
and the Home Health Agency Manual, clarifies the standards to be
applied in determining whether the skilled care requirement has
been met. The revisions emphasize that skilled care findings must
be individualized determinations and specify that coverage may be
available for the "management and evaluation of a patient care
plan." The court found that defendant’s revised home
health coverage standards, as well as measures HHS had taken to
ensure that the revised coverage guidelines are understood and
correctly applied, rendered plaintiffs’ claims moot.
Accordingly, the court granted HHS’s motion for summary
judgment.
Additional Information
Files
No files available.
