Bonta'

Redding Medical Center v. Bonta'

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 896·75 Cal. App. 4th 478·89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 348·99 Daily Journal DAR 10403·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8188
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 3, 1999No. B121754California2,703 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Masterson, J.

*480 Opinion

Appellant Redding Medical Center requested reimbursement from respondent, the California Department of Health Services (sometimes DHS), for the portion of hospital equipment expenses Redding claimed were attributable to services provided to Medi-Cal patients. DHS auditors later concluded that the instructions followed by Redding in mating its request, which required use of a statistical surrogate to calculate the extent of Medi-Cal usage, were inapplicable because Redding’s books and records permitted the direct assignment of these expenses. On Redding’s challenge to the audits, the administrative law judge and the superior court agreed with DHS. We also agree with DHS. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court denying Redding’s petition for writ of mandate.

Background

We summarize the law and facts pertinent to the issues raised by Redding in its briefing to this court. (See Tiernan v. Trustees of Cal. State University & Colleges (1982) 33 Cal.3d 211, 216, fn. 4 [ 188 Cal.Rptr. 115 , 655 P.2d 317 ].)

The Medicaid program, which is authorized by title XIX of the Social Security Act, 42 United States Code section 1396 et seq., is a health insurance…

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.