C.F.R. » Title 42 » CHAPTER IV—CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › SUBCHAPTER C—MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS › PART 435—ELIGIBILITY IN THE STATES, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS, AND AMERICAN SAMOA › Subpart J—Eligibility in the States and District of Columbia

42 C.F.R. § 435.919

[Reserved]

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Salazar v. Dist. of Columbia, 954 F. Supp. 278 (D.D.C. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Salazar v. Dist. of Columbia, 954 F. Supp. 278 (D.D.C. 1996). · cites it 2× “Claim 5: Unlawful Termination of Benefits The District of Columbia is required, under federal law, to “give [Medicaid] recipients timely and adequate notice of proposed action to terminate, discontinue, or suspend their eligibility” and to provide an opportunity for a hearing if…”
Salazar v. Dist. of Columbia, 896 F.3d 489 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “, 42 C.F.R. §§ 435.919 (a), 431.200 (1993).”
Henrietta D. v. Giuliani, 119 F. Supp. 2d 181 (E.D.N.Y. 2000). · cites it 2× “See 42 C.F.R. § 435.919 (Medicaid notice); 7 C.”
Jones v. Blinziner, 536 F. Supp. 1181 (N.D. Ind. 1982). · cites it 2× “210; see, 42 C.F.R. Section 435.919. 21. The standardized notices sent by the Department of Public Welfare to notify AFDC recipients of terminations or revisions in AFDC eligibility due to the changes in law contained in Pub.”
Kansas Hosp. Ass'n v. Whiteman, 835 F. Supp. 1556 (D. Kan. 1993). · cites it 2× “§ 1396a(a)(3), 42 C.F.R. § 435.919 , and 42 C.F.R. § 431.”
Johnson v. Guhl, 91 F. Supp. 2d 754 (D.N.J. 2000). “42 C.F.R. § 435.919 states in relevant part: "(a) The agency must give recipients timely and adequate notice of proposed action to terminate, discontinue, or suspend their eligibility or to reduce or discontinue services they may receive under Medicaid.”
NB v. Dist. of Columbia, 800 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2011). “§ 1396a(a)(3); 42 C.F.R. § 435.919 . The District of Columbia administers its Medicaid program through DHCF.”
Linda D. Tanner v. Texas Health & Human Servs. Comm'n, No. 15-25-00008-CV (Tex. App.—15th Dist. Apr. 15, 2025). · cites it 4× “903 , 42 CFR 435.919) (Linda D Tanner, Sophia Eleanor Moreno-jaquez, Layla Grace Tanner) isn't: (1) age 20 or younger, (2) age 65 or older, (3) pregnant, (4) someone with a disability, (5) a dependent child on this case , OR (6) a child who didn't get SSI (Supplemental Security…”
Linda D. Tanner v. Texas Health & Human Servs. Comm'n, No. 15-25-00008-CV (Tex. App.—15th Dist. June 13, 2025). · cites it 4× “903, 42 CFR 435.919) Layla Grace Tanner isn't: (1) age 20 or younger, (2) age 65 or older, (3) pregnant, (4) someone with a disability, (5) a dependent child on this case, OR (6) a child who didn't get SSI (Supplemental Security Income) due to the August 1996 change in…”
Crippen v. Dempsey, 549 F. Supp. 643 (W.D. Mich. 1982). “42 C.F.R. § 435.919 . Such notice must inform such a recipient that he may request a hearing to determine the propriety of the proposed termination.”
Doe ex rel. Doe v. Perales, 782 F. Supp. 201 (W.D.N.Y. 1991). “These include: —42 C.F.R. § 435.919, which requires that an agency give a recipient “timely and adequate notice” of proposed discontinuance, suspension or reduction in benefits; —42 C.”
John/Jane Doe v. Jeb Bush, 261 F.3d 1037 (11th Cir. 2001). “42 C.F.R. § 435.919 (a). 19 . Even if we were to assume that the Status Tracking Survey violates a substantive provision of federal law and is therefore invalid, that conclusion, by itself, would not provide a sufficient basis for holding defendants in contempt of the final…”
Show all 16 citing cases →
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.