Michael J. Friedrich v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

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 national court. See Terry Barr Sales Agency, Inc. v. All-Lock Co., 96 coverage determination by the Secretary was an interpretive F.3d 174, 178 (6th Cir. 1996). Summary judgment is rule
• stating that “[t]he extent of the impact is not an indicative factor” in characterizing the nature of a rule
• single decision of the Medicare Appeals Council was \not significant\ enough to support the plaintiff’s argument that the Secretary had not followed a consistent policy for denying coverage
• “National standards are essential if there is to be uniformity and equality in the administration of Medicare.”
• “The only legitimate claim of entitlement under Medicare is to those services that are reasonable and necessary. There is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a given medical procedure just because a doctor prescribes it or a patient requests it.” (citation omitted)
• “The only legitimate claim of entitlement under Medicare is to those services that are reasonable and necessary. There is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a given medical procedure just because a doctor prescribes it or a patient requests it.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).