Anna Jaques Hospital v. Sebelius

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that HHS’s explanation that it excluded certain hospitals’ wage data from PPS wage index because those hospitals “have significantly different labor costs” and “including them in [its] calculations would skew wage indexes” was sufficient
• agreeing that a provision instructing the Secretary to calculate “the wage index . . . ‘on the basis of’” survey data was ambiguous because it was “silent about whether she must use all of the survey data”
• permitting HHS to remove data from its survey that is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise aberrant
• deferring to HHS’s “expert view” that its chosen approach “would improve the overall equity of the wage index” (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted)
• declining to review whether the Department of Health and Human Services allegedly acted arbitrarily by applying different standards for similar hospitals when appellee failed to show the hospitals were indeed similarly situated
• declining to review whether the Department of Health and Human Services allegedly acted arbitrarily by applying different standards for similar hospitals when appellee failed to show the hospitals were indeed similarly situated

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).