Holmes

Holmes v. Kizer

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 4th 395·13 Cal. Rptr. 2d 746·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1376·92 Daily Journal DAR 15911·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9539
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 2, 1992F017484California4,655 words

Opinion

Opinion

Buckley, J.

Bari A. Holmes appeals from the judgment denying his petition for peremptory writ of mandate. The writ sought reversal of the denial by the director of the Department of Health Services of Medi-Cal coverage for the prescription drug, Marinol. Appellant contends the superior court’s findings are not supported by substantial evidence and the denial of coverage violates federal and state law as it was impermissibly based on the nature of appellant’s medical condition.

Statement of Facts

Appellant, a recipient of Medi-Cal benefits, suffers from nystagmus, an eye disorder which causes intermittent episodes in which his eyes rapidly oscillate (tilt upward), causing vertical double vision.

Appellant’s pharmacy, Sav Mor Drugs, submitted a treatment authorization request (TAR) for Medi-Cal coverage of the prescription medication Marinol. Marinol was prescribed for appellant by Dr. Bigelow, a family physician. The TAR was denied by the Department of Health Services (DHS) on August 8, 1988, on the ground that the medication was requested for an “unlabeled use.”

Marinol is not included in the Medi-Cal list of contract drugs and has not been approved by the federal Food and Drug…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.