United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
451 F.3d 496 (2006)
States participating in the Medicaid program must furnish medical assistance to the “categorically needy,” a group that includes blind, aged, and disabled individuals, pregnant women and children. Missouri participated in the Medicaid program and before 2005, had offered “durable medical equipment” (DME) as an optional benefit to all Medicaid recipients. DME included provision like wheelchairs, wheelchair batteries and repairs, orthotics, orthopedic devices, parenteral nutrition, augmentative communication devices, hospital beds, bed rails, lifts, and other prosthetics. Due to budget constraints, the state legislature eliminated the DME program in 2005, except for individuals who were blind, pregnant or children. Lankford (plaintiffs) and other disabled, adult Medicaid recipients brought an action against Sherman, Missouri’s Director of Social Services (defendant), seeking a preliminary injunction preventing Sherman from denying DME benefits to the majority of categorically-needy Medicaid recipients other than the blind. Lankford argued that Missouri’s actions violated federal requirements that the state treat Medicaid recipients equally and with reasonable, non-discriminatory standards and violated the supremacy clause. Sherman argued that its new regulation denying the DME benefits was valid because the state had applied to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for a waiver of the federal requirements. Also, Sherman argued that Medicaid recipients still had the option to apply for an exception if DME was needed or apply for home health care, which would grant them DME privileges. The district court denied the injunction and Lankford appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Benton, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 238,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 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.