Steiger v. Department of Public Welfare

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Steiger v. Department of Public Welfare

406 N.E.2d 415, 10 Mass. App. Ct. 820, 1980 Mass. App. LEXIS 1217

DecidedJuly 1, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 406 N.E.2d 415 (Steiger v. Department of Public Welfare) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Appeals Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Steiger v. Department of Public Welfare, 406 N.E.2d 415, 10 Mass. App. Ct. 820, 1980 Mass. App. LEXIS 1217 (Mass. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

There was no error in the entry of judgment for the defendant on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Mass.R.Civ.P. 56(c), 365 [821]*821Mass. 824 (1974). The defendant was not required to compensate the plaintiff for private psychological therapy under the Medicaid program. G. L. c. 118E, § 1. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(10)(A). The defendant’s decision to fund only that psychological therapy which is provided in a multidisciplinary setting is neither unreasonable (see Beal v. Doe, 432 U.S. 438, 444 [1977]) nor violative of the freedom of choice provisions of the Federal statute (42 U.S.C. § 1396a[a][23]). There is no merit to the plaintiff’s belated argument that the Commonwealth is estopped because some State employee gave her assurance that Medicaid would cover this expense. Doris v. Police Commr. of Boston, 374 Mass. 443, 449-450 (1978).

John J. Brothers for the plaintiff. Alan B. Sherr, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

There was no error in the entry of judgment for the defendant on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Mass.R.Civ.P. 56(c), 365 [821]*821Mass. 824 (1974). The defendant was not required to compensate the plaintiff for private psychological therapy under the Medicaid program. G. L. c. 118E, § 1. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(10)(A). The defendant’s decision to fund only that psychological therapy which is provided in a multidisciplinary setting is neither unreasonable (see Beal v. Doe, 432 U.S. 438, 444 [1977]) nor violative of the freedom of choice provisions of the Federal statute (42 U.S.C. § 1396a[a][23]). There is no merit to the plaintiff’s belated argument that the Commonwealth is estopped because some State employee gave her assurance that Medicaid would cover this expense. Doris v. Police Commr. of Boston, 374 Mass. 443, 449-450 (1978).

John J. Brothers for the plaintiff. Alan B. Sherr, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

406 N.E.2d 415, 10 Mass. App. Ct. 820, 1980 Mass. App. LEXIS 1217, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steiger-v-department-of-public-welfare-massappct-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack