Legal Opinion

Bock Associates v. Chronister

District Court, D. Kansas

Decided February 25, 1997No. 96-4110-RDRPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROGERS, District Judge.

This ease is now before the court upon defendant’s motion to dismiss the first amended complaint.

I. PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS

The first amended complaint alleges that plaintiff contracted with the State of Kansas to perform “preadmission screening and resident review” (“PASARR”) services for the state’s Medicaid program. Of course, Medicaid is funded with state and federal money, and there are state and federal regulations governing the program. PASARR is a federal requirement. The goals of the requirement are: to ensure that only legally eligible…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Reno v. FloresSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySupreme Court of the United States · 1979

42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Joseph S. v. HoganDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2008
  2. Sanders ex rel. Rayl v. Kansas Department of Social & Rehabilitation ServicesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2004
  3. Sanders Ex Rel. Rayl v. KANSAS DEPT. OF SOCIAL AND REHABIL. SERVICESDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2004
  4. Green v. City of Wichita, Kan.District Court, D. Kansas · 1999
  5. Russo v. School BoardDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2011

2 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