Legal Opinion
Golden Rule Insurance v. Stephens
District Court, E.D. Kentucky
Decided November 2, 1995No. 94-125PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
BERTELSMAN, Chief Judge:
Plaintiff, the Golden Rule Insurance Company, challenges the constitutionality of provisions of House Bill 250 (“HB 250”), a comprehensive health care reform measure enacted by the Kentucky Legislature. The matter was tried to the court, sitting without a jury, on May 30 and 31, 1995 and July 28, 1995.
FINDINGS OF FACT
A. The Act
On April 15, 1994, the Kentucky General Assembly enacted HB 250. The Act creates the Kentucky Health Policy Board (“the Board”), an independent agency of state government, and states that “[t]he goal of the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Kaiser Aetna v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.