Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-00027/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-00027-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 151
Nature of Suit: Overpayments under the Medicare Act
Cause of Action: 42:1395 HHS: Adverse Reimbursement Review

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

07cv1423

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KATHLEEN VESTEVICH,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 08-CV-27-L(JMA)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

COMPLAINT

In this declaratory relief action, Plaintiff seeks to obtain a declaration that Medicare has

no lien on the proceeds of a wrongful death settlement. Plaintiff settled her claims with two

insurance companies following the death of her husband in a motor vehicle accident, and

Medicare asserted a lien on the proceeds. Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend her

complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) to add Michael O. Leavitt,

Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”), as a

party defendant. For the reasons which follow, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.

Plaintiff filed her complaint on January 4, 2008. Defendant United States answered on

March 17, 2008. In its answer, the government noted that the Secretary was the real party in

interest in this action. (Answer at 1.) After unsuccessfully seeking the government’s agreement

to stipulate to amending the complaint to add the Secretary, Plaintiff moved for leave to amend

on April 14, 2008. In its opposition, the government does not dispute that the Secretary is a

Case 3:08-cv-00027-L-JMA Document 11 Filed 05/27/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

07cv1423

2

proper party defendant, but instead seeks a dismissal of all the remaining defendants. The

government also does not wish to waive its right to attack this court’s authority to hear this case,

claiming that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies. The government does not argue

that the amendment would be futile. See Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 80 F.3d 336, 339 (9th

Cir. 1996).

Because leave to amend shall be freely given, see Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 15(a)(2), and the

parties are in agreement that the Secretary is the real party in interest, Plaintiff’s motion for leave

to amend is GRANTED. To the extent the government seeks dismissal of the currently named

Defendants, the relief is DENIED without prejudice. Any party requesting a ruling from the

court must comply with Civil Local Rule 7.1, including obtaining a hearing date and filing a

motion.

For the foregoing reasons IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is GRANTED. No later than June 3, 2008,

Plaintiff shall file and serve the first amended complaint. Defendants shall file and serve a

response within the time provided in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3).

2. The government’s request to dismiss the currently named Defendants is DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE to asserting it in an appropriate motion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 27, 2008

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

HON. JAN M. ADLER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

Case 3:08-cv-00027-L-JMA Document 11 Filed 05/27/08 Page 2 of 2