Sunshine Haven Nursing Operations v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

2016 WL 9777239 (2016)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Sunshine Haven Nursing Operations v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

United States District Court for the District of New Mexico
2016 WL 9777239 (2016)

Play video

Facts

Sunshine Haven Nursing Operations (Sunshine) (plaintiff) was a nursing facility. An administrative law judge (ALJ) found that Sunshine was in violation of numerous federal regulations with regards to the quality of its facilities. Specifically, facility surveys found that (1) Sunshine was not providing its residents with the proper number of baths. The surveyor testified that this deficiency caused more than a risk of minimal harm. Sunshine submitted a plan of correction for the bath issue and addressed the deficiencies several weeks later. Another survey found that (2) a Sunshine staff member failed to use proper body transfer techniques, resulting in the bruising of a resident. Sunshine claimed that the bruises were suffered from an unavoidable accident. Sunshine also ordered the staff member who improperly transferred the resident to attend training, but did not submit documentation that the staff member attended training. Finally, another survey found that (3) Sunshine failed to have sufficient smoke detectors, sprinklers, and fire-rated walls and ceilings. Sunshine made improvements in this area, but was still found to not be in substantial compliance several months later. The surveyor told Sunshine that having contracts in place for corrections would constitute substantial compliance. Sunshine executed such contracts. Due to these deficiencies, Sunshine was assessed penalties and its agreement with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was terminated. A Health and Human Services board (defendant) upheld these penalties. The case was brought before the United States District Court of New Mexico.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Browning, 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 824,000 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 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 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 824,000 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
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 989 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