Legal Opinion

Wisconsin Department of Health & Family Services v. Blumer

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 20, 2002No. 00-952PublishedCited by 162 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Ginsburg

This case requires interpretation of the “spousal impoverishment” provisions of the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988 (MCCA or Act), 102 Stat. 754, 42 U. S. C. § 1396r-5 (1994 ed. and Supp. V), a complex set of instructions made part of the federal Medicaid statute. The *478spousal impoverishment provisions permit a spouse living at home (called the “community spouse”) to reserve certain income and assets to meet the minimum monthly maintenance needs he or she will have when the other spouse (the “institutionalized spouse”) is institutionalized, usually in a nursing home, and becomes…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
  2. Harris v. McRaeSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Thomas Jefferson University v. ShalalaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. K Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Batterton v. FrancisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by162 opinions

  1. United States v. YousefCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
  2. People v. KanaanMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. Dada v. MukaseySupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  4. United States v. YousefCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
  5. Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. AhlbornSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

157 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