green
Positive treatment
6.0 score
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
DeSario v. Thomas
Compare Preterm, Inc. v. Dukakis, 591 F.2d 121, 125 (1st Cir. 1979) (dictum in Beal does not require a state plan to provide all services within a *133 mandatory category deemed medically necessary by a patient’s physician); Curtis v. Taylor, 625 F.2d 645, 652 (5th Cir.1980) (state may limit services based on a judgment of degree of medical services so long as it does not discriminate based on medical condition) with Dexter v. Kirschner, 972 F.2d 1113, 1117 (9th Cir.1992) (participating states “must provide assistance to pay for medically necessary impatient hospital and physician’s serv…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Salgado v. Kirschner
Dexter v. Kir-schner, 972 F.2d 1113, 1117 (9th Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Pittman v. Secretary
Meusberger v. Palmer, 900 F.2d 1280, 1282 (8th Cir.1990); Ellis v. Patterson, 859 F.2d 52 , 55 (8th Cir.1988); Dexter v. Kirschner, 972 F.2d 1113, 1117 (9th Cir.1992) (adopting the reasoning of the two Eighth Circuit cases).
cited
Cited "see"
Utah Women's Clinic, Inc. v. Graham
See, generally Dexter v. Kirschner, 972 F.2d 1113, 1117 (9th Cir.1992); Pinneke v. Preisser, 623 F.2d 546, 549 (8th Cir.1980); Montoya v. Johnston, 654 F.Supp. 511, 512-13 (W.D.Tex.1987).
cited
Cited "see"
Pereira ex rel. Pereira v. Kozlowski
Accord Dexter v. Kirschner, 972 F.2d 1113 (9th Cir.1992) (following Ellis); Meusberger v. Palmer, 900 F.2d 1280 (8th Cir.1990) (same); Miller ex rel.
cited
Cited "see"
Pereira v. Kozlowski
Accord Dexter v. Kirschner, 972 F.2d 1113 (9th Cir.1992) (following Ellis ); Meusberger v. Palmer, 900 F.2d 1280 (8th Cir.1990) (same); Miller ex rel.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fred PERRY, Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
STATE OF MONTANA, Respondent-Appellant
v.
STATE OF MONTANA, Respondent-Appellant
91-35285.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Aug 18, 1992.
Wright, Norris, Hall.
Published
The petition for rehearing, filed April 28, 1992 is GRANTED.
This court’s opinion, filed April 15, 1992 is hereby withdrawn.