U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 6A— PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER IV— CONSTRUCTION AND MODERNIZATION OF HOSPITALS AND OTHER MEDICAL FACILITIES › Part Part D— General Provisions

42 U.S.C. § 291m

State control of operations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

Except as otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this subchapter shall be construed as conferring on any Federal officer or employee the right to exercise any supervision or control over the administration, personnel, maintenance, or operation of any facility with respect to which any funds have been or may be expended under this subchapter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1962–1992 · leading case: Am. Hosp. Ass'n v. Richard S. Schweiker, & Illinois Migrant Council, Intervening, 721 F.2d 170 (7th Cir. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Am. Hosp. Ass'n v. Richard S. Schweiker, & Illinois Migrant Council, Intervening, 721 F.2d 170 (7th Cir. 1983). · cites it 4× “Section 291m of Title VI also states that “[ejxcept as otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this subchapter shall be construed as conferring on any Federal officer or employee the right to exercise any supervision or control over the administration, personnel,…”
Rafaela Euresti v. Richard Stenner, as Adm'r of the Weld Cnty. Gen. Hosp., 458 F.2d 1115 (10th Cir. 1972). · cites it 2× “Ill, concluded that the Act did not create any contractual relationship between the United States and appellees; that, if it did, appellants have no standing to sue; and that, in any event, the action was barred by the Act itself in 42 U.S.C. § 291m, 2 limiting federal…”
United States of Am., Cross-Appellee v. Harris Methodist Fort Worth, Cross-Appellant, 970 F.2d 94 (5th Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 291m (emphasis added). Insofar as both of those statutes are qualified by the underlined language, they do not prevent enforcement o£ §§ 601 or 604 of Title VI.”
Wyoming Hosp. Ass'n v. Harris, 527 F. Supp. 551 (D. Wyo. 1981). · cites it 2× “The argument centers around the wording of 42 U.S.C. § 291m, which reads as follows: Except as otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this title shall be construed as conferring on any Federal officer or employee the right to exercise any supervision or control over the…”
Poirrier v. St. James Par. Police Jury, 372 F. Supp. 1021 (E.D. La. 1974). · cites it 4× “Moreover, Justice Clark avoided the impact of 42 U.S.C. § 291m, 2 which restricts federal authority over actual hospital operations, by finding that it does not apply to matters dealt with specifically by the Act.”
State of Wisconsin, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Plaintiff v. Otis R. Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 797 F.2d 391 (7th Cir. 1986). “" 42 U.S.C. § 291m. . In footnote 8, the majority states that "we do not find utilization review relevant to the question before us____” However, as detailed in this dissent utilization review includes a review of the attending physician's recommendation regarding the transfer…”
Nashville Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Binkley, 534 S.W.2d 318 (Tenn. 1976). “…or operation of any facility with respect to which any funds have been or may be expended under this subchapter.” 42 U.S.C.A. § 291m.”
Slavcoff v. Harrisburg Polyclinic Hosp., 375 F. Supp. 999 (M.D. Penn. 1974). “42 U.S.C. § 291m provides: “Except as otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this subchapter shall be construed as conferring on any Federal officer or employee the right to exercise any supervision or control over the administration, personnel, maintenance, or operation of…”
Modaber v. Culpeper Mem'l Hosp., Inc., 674 F.2d 1023 (4th Cir. 1982). “Indeed, the statute’s prohibition of federal interference with hospital administration “except as otherwise specifically provided”, see 42 U.S.C. § 291m (1974), indicates that Congress intended to avoid such involvement.”
Wood v. Hogan, 215 F. Supp. 53 (W.D. Va. 1963). “’ (42 U.S.C.A. § 291m). “The hospital was established pursuant to a charter, granted by the Commonwealth, conferring upon its public spirited organizers the right and authority to operate as a private corporation.”
Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp., 211 F. Supp. 628 (M.D.N.C. 1962). “42 U.S.C.A. § 291m. 11 . Sections 105-296 and 105-297, General Statutes of North Carolina.”
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.