Curtis v. Child
Idaho Supreme Court
1DissentMcFADDEN, Justice
It is my conclusion that the majority opinion erred in concluding I.C. § 56-209b requires medical assistance (Medicaid) to be furnished to not only the “categorically needy” but to all who are “medically needy.” As I read the statute, medical assistance must be furnished only to those who are considered- as “categorically needy” leaving the other category optional.
This Court on several occasions has considered the administrative interpretation given statutes as a guideline in arriving at what the legislature intended in enacting a particular statute. In Application of Idaho Hospital Ass’n, 73…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Flemming v. NestorSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- King v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.