Legal Opinion
United States v. State of Ohio
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided April 3, 1992No. 91-3289PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDGAR, District Judge.
The district court entered a declaratory judgment that the “economic loss” requirement in Ohio’s Victims of Crime Act, Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 2743.52 (Anderson 1981 & *232Supp.1990), conflicts with and is preempted by 38 U.S.C. § 1729.1 The State of Ohio was ordered to pay the United States the reasonable cost of medical treatment provided to Ohio resident David F. Bernath (“Bernath”) by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. 756 F.Supp. 340. The State of Ohio appealed. We AFFIRM.
I
Bernath was the victim of a violent crime in Ohio. He received medical treatment at…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Crandon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Free v. BlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Pinney Dock And Transport Co. v. Penn Central Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. State of New Jersey Violent Crimes Compensation BoardCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- United States v. State of Maryland Criminal Injuries Compensation Board of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- James D. Hood II v. Ronald T. Keller Richard H. Finan Kenneth L. MorckelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- United States Department of Veterans Affairs v. BoresiSupreme Court of Missouri · 2013
- State v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1999
- United States v. Capital Blue CrossCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Maryland, Incorporated, Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, Amicus CuriaeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.