42 C.F.R. § 431.223
Denial or dismissal of request for a hearing
The agency may deny or dismiss a request for a hearing if—
(a) The applicant or beneficiary withdraws the request. The agency must accept withdrawal of a fair hearing request via any of the modalities available per § 431.221(a)(1)(i). For telephonic hearing withdrawals, the agency must record the individual's statement and telephonic signature. For telephonic, online and other electronic withdrawals, the agency must send the affected individual written confirmation, via regular mail or electronic notification in accordance with the individual's election under § 435.918(a) of this chapter.
(b) The applicant or beneficiary fails to appear at a scheduled hearing without good cause.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 2010–2020 · leading case: Fishman ex rel. Fishman v. Daines, 164 F. Supp. 3d 409 (E.D.N.Y 2016).
Fishman ex rel. Fishman v. Daines, 164 F. Supp. 3d 409 (E.D.N.Y 2016). “The Second Circuit directed that, on remand, this Court “should ask whether plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that New York violates their § 1396a(a)(3) fail-hearing right as defined further by any relevant federal regulations, including 42 C.F.R. § 431.223 .” Id.…”
Fishman v. Daines, 743 F. Supp. 2d 127 (E.D.N.Y 2010). “) The State Medicaid Manual (“the Manual”), a document published by HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, suggests that this standard is met only when the state agency notifies the appellant that he missed the hearing and the appellant fails to respond. Specifically,…”
Fishman ex rel. Fishman v. Paolucci, 628 F. App'x 797 (2d Cir. 2015). “” Plaintiffs read this regulation as requiring the state to ascertain before immediately acting whether the beneficiary lacked good cause for failing to appear and contend that the regulatory history and agency interpretations (through the State Medicaid Manual 2 ) of the…”
Fishman ex rel. Fishman v. Daines, 247 F. Supp. 3d 238 (E.D.N.Y 2017). “The Second Circuit directed that the Court “should ask whether plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that New York violates their § 1396a(a)(3) fair hearing right as defined further by any relevant federal regulations, including 42 C.F.R. § 431.223 .” Id. Following…”
J.G. Vs. Div. of Med. Assistance & Health Servs. (Div. of Med. Assistance & Health Servs.) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). “" See 42 C.F.R. § 431.223 . The Division argues it failed to schedule a fair hearing because FCC "lacked authorization from J.”
D.A. Vs. Div. of Med. Assistance & Health Servs. (Div. of Med. Assistance & Health Servs.) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2020). “Petitioner argues that denial of her fair hearing request was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. Further, petitioner argues that DMAHS can only refuse a fair hearing request if: (1) the applicant withdraws the request in writing, or (2) the applicant fails to appear at a…”
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.