42 C.F.R. § 430.14
Review of State plan material
CMS regional staff reviews State plans and plan amendments, discusses any issues with the Medicaid agency, and consults with central office staff on questions regarding application of Federal policy.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 2001–2019 · leading case: State of West Virginia v. Tommy G. Thompson, Sec'y of the United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 475 F.3d 204 (4th Cir. 2007).
State of West Virginia v. Tommy G. Thompson, Sec'y of the United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 475 F.3d 204 (4th Cir. 2007). “The administrative process for plan amendments gives a state “opportunities to petition for reconsideration, brief its arguments, be heard at a formal hearing, receive reasoned decisions at multiple levels of review, and submit exceptions to those decisions.”
RCJ Med. Servs., Inc. v. Bonta´, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7384 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “( 42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2000).) The HCFA regional administrator has the authority to approve state plans and plan amendments.”
Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. v. Betlach, 899 F. Supp. 2d 868 (D. Ariz. 2012). “42 C.F.R. § 430.14 . CMS then exercises its delegated authority either to approve the state plan or to disapprove the plan after consulting with the Secretary.”
Ansley v. Banner Health, 437 P.3d 899 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “Contrary to the Hospitals' contention, CMS determines only whether the plan a state submits conforms with the Medicaid Act and related federal regulations; Congress has not granted CMS authority to determine the validity of state law.”
Timm v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2008 MT 126 (Mont. 2008). “42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2007). ¶ 5 Medicaid benefits are determined in a two-step process.”
Cmty. Health Ctr. v. Wilson-Coker, 311 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2002). “” 42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2002). We take care not lightly to disrupt the informed judgments of those who must labor daily in the minefield of often arcane policy, especially given the substantive complexities of the Medicaid statute.”
Asante v. California Dep't of Health Care Servs., 155 F. Supp. 3d 1008 (N.D. Cal. 2015). “” 42 C.F.R. § 430.14 . (3)"The Regional Administrator exercises delegated authority to approve the State plan and plan amendments on the basis of policy statements and precedents previously approved by the Administrator.”
Ansley v. Banner Health, 419 P.3d 552 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “Contrary to the Hospitals' contention, CMS determines only whether the plan a state submits conforms with the Medicaid Act and related federal regulations; Congress has not granted the agency the authority to determine the validity of state law.”
West Virginia Dep't of Health & Human Resources v. Sebelius, 709 F. Supp. 2d 487 (S.D.W. Va 2010). “42 C.F.R. §§ 430.14 , 430.15. 2 . Citations to “AR-" refer to the administrative record filed with the court on November 20, 2009.”
State of WV v. Thompson (4th Cir. 2007). “42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2005). The administrative process for plan amendments gives a state "opportunities to petition for recon- sideration, brief its arguments, be heard at a formal hearing, receive reasoned decisions at multiple levels of review, and submit exceptions to those…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.