Hines v. Department of Public Aid
Illinois Supreme Court
221 Ill. 2d 222, 850 N.E.2d 148 (2006)
Facts
Julius Tutinas received Medicaid nursing-home-care coverage through the Illinois Department of Public Aid (DPA) (plaintiff). Julius did not have long-term care insurance. When Julius received Medicaid coverage, he was over the age of 55 and married to his wife, Beverly Tutinas. Beverly never received Medicaid benefits. Beverly and Julius jointly owned a house and a car but no other assets. After Julius’s death, the house and car passed automatically into Beverly’s sole name, leaving Julius without a probate estate. Beverly died several years later, and the only assets in her probate estate were the house and the car she had formerly held in joint title with Julius. Beverly’s sister, Betty Hines (defendant), was appointed as the personal representative of Beverly’s estate. DPA filed a claim against Beverly’s estate to recover Julius’s nursing-home-care costs. Hines, on behalf of Betty’s estate, challenged the claim. The circuit court ruled that DPA could recover against Beverly’s estate. Hines appealed, and the appellate court reversed, holding that the federal Medicaid Act prohibited recovery from Beverly’s estate because (1) Julius did not have long-term care insurance; and (2) Illinois law did not allow recovery of formerly joint assets held in the surviving spouse’s estate. DPA appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Karmeier, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
