Legal Opinion · Dissent

Curtis v. Child

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 5, 1972No. 10861, 10862Published

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

  1. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Flemming v. NestorSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  5. King v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1968

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

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

Powered by the Exa API