Legal Opinion
Pennsylvania Protection & Advocacy, Inc. v. Houston
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 29, 2001No. 2:00-cv-04332PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
VAN ANTWERPEN, District Judge.
Presently before this Court is the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) (lack of subject matter jurisdiction). For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
Title XIX of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq., establishes the federal Medical Assistance program. The program is a cost sharing arrangement between the states and the federal government, whereby the federal government reimburses some state expenses if a state elects to provide…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clark v. Burger King Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2003
- Aiken v. NixonDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2002
- Iowa Protection & Advocacy Services, Inc. v. Gerard Treatment Programs, L.L.C.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2001
- Dunn v. DunnDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 2016
- Danvers Motor Co., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.