Kingsley v. Daniels

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a Medicare Advantage enrollee’s state court action seeking a declaration that an MAO was not entitled to reimbursement was a claim arising under the Medicare Act that must be exhausted before any judicial review
• “Congress amended the MSP in 2003 to include tortfeasors and their insurance carriers” within the definition of a primary plan.
• “There is nothing in the statute to support Collins’ interpretation that the Medicare organization must engage in a thorough investigation to unequivocally ascertain whether payment from another source can be expected.”
• declaratory judgment that Medicare provider was not entitled to refund

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).