Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rekhter v. Department of Social & Health Services

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 2014No. 86822-1Published

1DissentStephens, J.

¶62 (dissenting) — The lead opinion embraces the providers’ misguided argument that the Department of Social and Health Services’ (DSHS) statutory obligations in developing client service plans translate into contractual discretion to determine a future contract term. As a result it authorizes the use of a private contract action to impose on the State what amounts to strict liability for misinterpreting federal Medicaid comparability law. I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the judgment in favor of the providers on their claim for breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Carma Developers (California), Inc. v. Marathon Development California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Metavante Corp. v. Emigrant Savings BankCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
  3. Badgett v. Security State BankWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Amoco Oil Co. v. ErvinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  5. Young v. YoungWashington Supreme Court · 2008

25 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