Legal Opinion
Sandefur v. Cherry
District Court, M.D. Louisiana
Decided August 18, 1982No. Civ. A. 80-64PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
JOHN V. PARKER, Chief Judge.
The Plaintiffs, doctors of optometry, are duly licensed to practice in Louisiana, and they are authorized providers of eye health care services under Title XIX of the Social Security Act — “Medicaid,” 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq.
The Defendant, George Fischer, substituted by amended complaint filed July 14, 1980 for William A. Cherry, M.D., is Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Resources of the State of Louisiana and is the state official charged with the administration of the State Plan for Medical Services, and…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Hagans v. LavineSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Haguer v. Committee for Industrial OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sandefur v. CherryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Sandefur v. CherrySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1984
- Sandefur v. CherryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Sandefur v. CherryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983