Warren Albert, D.C. et al v. Sebelius et al

Plaintiff: NY Chiropractic Care, P.C. and Warren Albert, D.C.
Defendant: Kathleen Sebelius and United States Department of Health and Human Services
Case Number: 1:2013cv04542
Filed: August 12, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Frederic Block
Referring Judge: Robert M. Levy
Nature of Suit: Contract: Recovery Medicare
Cause of Action: 42:1395 HHS: Adverse Reimbursement Review
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 28, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 34 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: The Defendant's motion 18 for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED and Plaintiff's motion 20 for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. The Court reverses the decision of the Council and remands for further proceedings consistent with this opinion pursuant to the fourthsentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Council shall reconsider whether Dr. Alberts services were reimbursable in light of a correct interpretation of the relevant documentation guideli nes. For guidance on remand, the Council shall not deny Dr. Alberts claims solely for failure to submit an eight-element medical history, but rather shall considerwhether the medical history he did submit, when taken in totality with his other treatm ent notes, demonstrates that the patient ha[s] a significant health problem in the form of a neuro-musculoskeletal condition necessitating treatment and that the manipulative services rendered... have a direct therapeutic relationship to the patients condition and provide reasonable expectation of recovery or improvement of function. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 7/28/2015. (Innelli, Michael)
January 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 25 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Court requests supplementary briefing and oral argument on two questions: (1) What level of deference should the Court apply to the Medicare Appeals Councils interpretation of the relevant LCD? (2) Should the Court defer to the Councils interpretation in this case? Written submissions are due by March 30, 2015. Oral argument is scheduled for April 17, 2015, at 11:00 a.m. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 1/30/2015. (Innelli, Michael)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Warren Albert, D.C. et al v. Sebelius et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: NY Chiropractic Care, P.C.
Represented By: Roy W. Breitenbach
Represented By: Jason Hsi
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Warren Albert, D.C.
Represented By: Roy W. Breitenbach
Represented By: Jason Hsi
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Kathleen Sebelius
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United States Department of Health and Human Services
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?