Legal Opinion
Matarazzo v. Rowe
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 6, 1993No. 14593PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether the department of income maintenance, by virtue of Connecticut’s status as a § 209 (b) state under federal medicaid law, is required to grant medicaid coverage to the plaintiff for her outstanding medical bills retroactive to the time the plaintiff, having later spent her resources down to medicaid eligibility requirements, filed her application for such benefits. The plaintiff, Giuseppina Matarazzo, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing her appeal from the decision of a fair hearing officer of the department of income…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Harris v. McRaeSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- General Electric Co. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Schweiker v. Gray PanthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Truelove & MacLean, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Forsyth v. RoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Christopher R. v. Commissioner of Mental RetardationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Bezzini v. Department of Social ServicesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Ahern v. ThomasSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.