Enforcement of consent decree. The district court properly denied a request to hold the Indiana Medicaid agency in civil contempt for noncompliance with a consent decree because the deliberate violation of an unambiguous order had not been established by clear and convincing evidence. The consent decree required the agency to collect and examine information to determine disability in the same way that determinations of eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) are made under applicable regulations. The regulations and the consent decree require a complete medical history for the 12 months preceding the application, but the term "complete medical history" was undefined. The consent decree does not specifically require the agency to obtain 12 months of medical records from every provider who has examined the applicant in that period. Because the district court found that some of the sample files were complete under any standard, and neither party had presented evidence of what constitutes a complete medical history, its finding that contempt had not been established by clear and convincing evidence was proper
Bailey v. Roob, 7th Cir., June 8, 2009.
For more information on this and related topics, consult the CCH® Medicare and Medicaid Guide.
Visit our News Library to read more news stories.
