Monday, June 08, 2009
Ind. Decisons - 7th Circuit issues one Indiana opinion today
In Bailey, et al. v. E. Mitchell Roob, Jr. (SD Ind., Judge Barker), a 24-page opinion, Judge Flaum writes:
Years ago, a group of plaintiffs and the Indiana Medicaid program’s administrators agreed to certain terms for the handling of applications to the disability program in Indiana: most relevant for present purposes was a concession that the program would compile a complete twelve-month medical history before reaching a decision on the application. Now, several members of the affected class want to hold the program administrators in civil contempt for violating that portion of the consent decree. They claim that in too many cases the program is relying on summary forms rather than compiling an applicant’s complete medical history.
The district court rejected the motion because the plain- tiffs had not demonstrated by clear and convincing evi- dence that the defendants were in violation of the terms of the consent decree. Appellants now challenge that ruling, citing three errors. First, they claim the district court improperly tasked them with demonstrating that the plaintiffs had not been reasonably diligent in following the demands of the consent decree. Second, they argue that the district court should have held that the evidence proffered below was a clear and convincing demonstration that the program administrators were violating the decree. Third, they argue that the district court erred as a matter of law by holding that 20 C.F.R. § 416.912(d), a provision of the regulations for the Sup- plem ental Security Incom e disability program incorporated by reference into the consent decree, did not require a full collection of medical records.
For the following reasons, we affirm the district court’s ruling.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 8, 2009 11:30 AM
Posted to Ind. (7th Cir.) Decisions