Over the last three years, a number of courts have decided questions about EPSDT.2 The cases discussed below are significant because they decide substantive (as opposed to procedural) questions about how states must implement EPSDT to comply with the Medicaid Act?s minimum standards. After listing the cases, this fact sheet discusses the trends emerging from them and then summarizes each case.
The EPSDT Cases
Frew v. Hawkins, 124 S.Ct. 899 (2004), rev?g., Frazar v. Gilbert, 300 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 2002), vacating and remanding, 109 F. Supp. 2d 579 (E.D. Tex. 2000)
Collins v. Hamilton, 349 F.3d 371 (7th Cir. 2003), aff?g, 231 F. Supp. 2d 840 (S.D. Ind. 2002) (hereinafter Collins)
Pediatric Specialty Care v. Ark. Dep?t of Human Services & Knickrehm, 293 F.3d 472 (8th Cir. 2002) (hereinafter Pediatric Specialty Care)
S.D. v. Hood, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23535 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 5, 2002) (hereinafter S.D.)
Emily Q. v. Bonta, 208 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (C.D. Cal. 2001) (hereinafter Emily Q.)
John B. v. Menke, 176 F. Supp. 2d 786 (M.D. Tenn. 2001) (hereinafter John B.)
Chisholm v. Hood, 133 F. Supp. 2d 894 (E.D. La. 2001) (hereinafter Chisholm)
Semerzakis v. Wilson-Coker, 2003 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2378 (Dec. 24, 2003) (hereinafter Semerzakis)
Manglass v. R.I. Dep?t of Human Services, 2003 R.I. Super. LEXIS 122 (Super. Ct. Oct. 6, 2003) (hereinafter Manglass)
Jackson v. Millstone, 369 Md. 575, 801 A.2d 1034 (Md. Ct. App. 2002) (hereinafter Jackson)
Georgia Dep?t of Community Health v. Freels, 258 Ga. App. 446, 576 S.E. 2d 2 (Ga. Ct. App.2002) (hereinafter Freels)
——————————————————————–
Text has been truncated. For full publication text, download document.
