Source: http://www.annalsofhealthlaw.com/annalsofhealthlaw/vol_23_issue_1?pg=60
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 01:55:34+00:00

Document:
196. See, e.g., Pashby v. Delia, 709 F.3d 307 (4th Cir. 2013); Indep. Living Ctr. of S. Cal., Inc. v. Maxwell-Jolly, 572 F.3d 644 (9th Cir. 2009), vacated and remanded sub nom., Douglas v. Indep. Living Ctr. of S. Cal., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1204 (2012); United Hosp. Med. Ctr. v. State, 793 A.2d 1 (N.J. Sup. Ct. App. Div. 2002); see also Sara Rosenbaum, Medicaid Payment Rate Lawsuits: Evolving Court Views Mean Uncertain Future for Medi-Cal 1, 6, 13–14 (Oct. 2009), http://www.chcf.org/~/media/MEDIA%20LIBRARY%20Files/PDF/ M/PDF%20MediCalProviderRateLitigation.pdf.
197. See, e.g., Clark v. Kizer, 758 F. Supp. 572 (E. D. Cal. 1990); aff’d in part, rev’d in part, Clark v. Coye, 967 F.2d 585 (9th Cir. 1992); see also Clark, supra note 191, at 800–01, 823–25.
198. Sanchez v. Johnson, 416 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2005); see also Rosenbaum, supra note 196, at 1–2, 9.
199. See, e.g., Douglas v. Indep. Living Ctr. of S. Cal., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1204, 1208 (2012) (explaining the plaintiffs’ pre-emption claim based on the Social Security Act); see also Clark, supra note 191, at 823–25; Rosenbaum, supra note 196, at 1–2.
200. Douglas, 132 S. Ct. at 1208.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.