Poindexter v. Illinois

890 N.E.2d 410 (2008)

From our private database of 47,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Poindexter v. Illinois

Illinois Supreme Court
890 N.E.2d 410 (2008)

Facts

Robert Poindexter, Mirl Whitaker, Maurice Hardy, Virginia McCulley, and Roger Meredith (the community spouses) (plaintiffs) each had a spouse who was institutionalized in a nursing home and receiving Medicaid benefits. After the institutionalized spouses received their benefits, Illinois (defendant) sought to recover the nursing-home costs from the respective community spouses pursuant to Illinois’s spousal-support laws. The community spouses sued Illinois, seeking a declaration that the state’s spousal-support laws conflicted with the federal Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act (MCCA) and were thus preempted. Illinois argued that the supposedly conflicting provision in the MCCA related only to determining a person’s eligibility for Medicaid benefits and did not govern a state’s right to recover the costs of those benefits from financially able community spouses. The trial court held in the community spouses’ favor, but the appellate court reversed. The community spouses appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Fitzgerald, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 899,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. 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.

Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,000 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership