Legal Opinion
Bontrager v. Indiana Family & Social Services Administration
District Court, N.D. Indiana
Decided November 4, 2011No. 3:11-cv-216PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION and ORDER
PHILIP P. SIMON, Chief Judge.
Sandra Bontrager is a Medicaid recipient living in Indiana and in need of serious dental procedures including implants and abutments for her mandibular jaw. Everyone admits that these procedures are “medically necessary” as defined by Indiana law. Nevertheless, the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (the agency that handles the state’s Medicaid program) has refused to pay for these procedures because they exceed the new $1,000 annual limit that the Administration has put on dental reimbursements. Bontrager has thus filed this class…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Gonzaga University v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Blessing v. FreestoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Alexander v. ChoateSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Joseph Di Biase v. SPX CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2017
- Bontrager v. Indiana Family & Social Services AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- Bowman v. Internationa Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2012
- Di Biase v. SPX CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2021
- Jeannot v. New York StateDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2025
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.