O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 31-6-50 (2019)

Application of review procedures to expenditures under Section 1122 of the federal Social Security Act

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The review and appeal considerations and procedures set forth in Code Sections 31-6-42 through 31-6-44, respectively, shall apply to and govern the review of capital expenditures under the Section 1122 program of the federal Social Security Act of 1935, as amended, including, but not limited to, any application for approval under Section 1122 which is under consideration by the Health Planning Agency or on appeal before the Certificate of Need Appeal Panel, successor to the former Health Planning Review Board as of June 30, 2008.

History

(Code 1981, § 31-6-50, enacted by Ga. L. 1983, p. 1566, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 149, § 31; Ga. L. 1999, p. 296, § 22; Ga. L. 2008, p. 12, § 1-1/SB 433.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Offering continuing care when resident purchases resident owned living unit, § 33-45-7.1. Administration of mental health and developmental disabilities services generally, T. 37, C. 2. Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 1983, p. 1566, § 1, effective July 1, 1983, repealed the Code sections formerly codified at this chapter, also pertaining to state health planning and development, and enacted the current chapter. The former chapter consisted of Code Sections 31-6-1, 31-6-2, 31-6-20 through 31-6-28, and 31-6-40 through 31-6-51 and was based on Ga. L. 1978, p. 941, § 4; Ga. L. 1979, p. 1109, §§ 1-3; and Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 31.

Administrative rules and regulations. - Administration, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Department of Community Health, Health Planning, Chapter Certificate of need, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Department of Community Health, Health Planning, Chapter Patient’s right to independent review, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Department of Community Health, Health Planning, Chapter 111-2-3.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Enforcement of chapter. - Prior to the 1983 reenactment, O.C.G.A. T. 31, Ch. 6, authorized a health planning agency to bring an action to enforce provisions of that chapter, but did not give standing to

a competitor of a health service provider. Executive Comm. v. Metro Ambulance Servs., Inc., 250 Ga. 61, 296 S.E.2d 547 (1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Regulation of practice of acupuncture, 17 A.L.R.4th 964.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. Proof of Facts. - Denial of Hospital Staff Privileges, 1 POF2d 65. Hospital’s Failure to Supervise Private Physician Using Hospital Facilities, 6 POF2d 647. Hospital Liability for Negligent Selection of Staff Physician, 14 POF3d 433. Hospital Liability for Negligent Retention of Staff Physician, 15 POF3d 181.

Discrimination in Provision of Medical Services on Basis of Disability, 49 POF3d 1. Liability of Physician for Improper Referral of Patients to a Medical Care Facility in which Physician has a Financial Interest, 61 POF3d 245. Liability of Health Maintenance Organizations, 66 POF3d 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2019–2019 · leading case: UHS of Anchor, L.P. v. Dep't of Cmty. Health, 830 S.E.2d 413 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).
UHS of Anchor, L.P. v. Dep't of Cmty. Health, 830 S.E.2d 413 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “1) ("Notwithstanding the other provisions of this chapter, this chapter shall not apply to[, ] [e]xcept as provided in paragraph (10) of this subsection, expenditures for the minor or major repair of a health care facility or a facility that is exempt from the requirements of…”
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.