Legal Opinion

California Ass'n of Rural Health Clinics v. Maxwell-Jolly

District Court, E.D. California

Decided October 18, 2010No. CIV. S-10-759 FDC/EFBPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR., District Judge.

This matter is before the court on plaintiffs California Association of Rural Health Clinics (“CARHC”) and Avenal Community Health Center (“ACHC”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) motion for summary judgment. The parties agree this case presents purely legal questions involving the federal Medicaid law definitions of mandatory Rural Health Clinic (“RHC”) and Federally-Qualified Health Center (“FQHC”) services benefits, and thus, resolution of the case via plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is appropriate. 1

Plaintiffs contend Congress…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Gonzaga University v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  3. Blessing v. FreestoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  4. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Arlington Central School District Board of Education v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 2006

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Am. Indian Health & Servs. Corp. v. Kent, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  2. California Hospital Ass'n v. Maxwell-JollyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2011
  3. Mendocino Community Health Clinic v. State Department of Health Care ServicesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. American Indian Health etc. v. KentCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API