Legal Opinion

Johnson v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided July 26, 2005No. 04-61020UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM: *

Reviewing the record de novo, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of Johnson’s suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction for the following reasons:

1. Because Johnson’s claim that the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is not entitled to reimbursement from his settlement proceeds requires interpretation of the Medicare Secondary Payer statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(2), the claim arises under the Medicare Act. See Heckler v. Ringer, 466 U.S. 602, 614-15, 104 S.Ct. 2013, 80 L.Ed.2d 622 (1984). He is therefore required to channel the claim through the agency…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Heckler v. RingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Shalala v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Thompson v. GoetzmannCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
  4. McGowin v. Manpower International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2004
  5. Nygren v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2003

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Collins v. Wellcare Healthcare Plans, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2014
  2. McClurg v. MI Holdings, Inc.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API