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
Paschall v. District of Columbia Department of Health
No. 03-AA-1347 (D.C. Ct. App. April 7, 2005) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55943
Description
Administrative Law Judge May Order Illegally Discharged Patient’s Readmission to Medicaid-Certified Nursing Home
Abstract
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled that administrative
law judge had authority to order readmission of a patient who had
been illegally discharged from a Medicaid-participating nursing
facility. Petitioner received a notice of discharge from the
facility while he was in a hospital for treatment of abdominal
pain. Petitioner submitted a motion to quash and requested a
hearing on the sufficiency of the notice. Administrative law judge
found the notice deficient and the discharge illegal but, pursuant
to a District of Columbia statute that reserved equity jurisdiction
in such cases to the superior court, said that he could not order
petitioner’s readmission. Although the statute did not
explicitly grant administrative law judge authority to order
readmission, the appellate court found such authority to be
implicit. The appellate court mockingly rejected health
department’s argument that administrative law judge had
authority to order readmission only after a hearing on the merits,
not on a finding of defective notice. Administrative law
judge’s authority to order readmission before or after
hearing was, the appellate court continued, explicit in the federal
regulations governing discharges from Medicare- and
Medicaid-participating facilities; the regulations were
incorporated into the District of Columbia statute. The appellate
court ruled in the case despite the case’s apparent mootness
because it raised issues important to the resolution of a class of
future cases.
