Case Law Library

This appeal presents several issues concerning qualification for Medicaid benefits for an institutionalized spouse and a community spouse. The main question to be addressed in this appeal is whether the Medicaid Act authorizes the limitation of the resources a couple may invest in an annuity to the amount of assets which may be retained for use by the community spouse. An additional question for consideration in this case is whether a commercial irrevocable and non-assignable annuity, the type of annuity involved in this appeal, may be sold on the secondary market rendering it an available asset that in some instances would render the applicant ineligible for benefits.

At issue is whether the hearing officer erred as a matter of law when finding the annuity was a countable resource and that Transmittal No. 64 was inapplicable to the annuity in question.

At issue is whether an IRA in the name the community spouse can be included as a countable resource for purposes of determining the institutionalized spouse's Medicaid eligibility.

In contemplation in this case is whether the Irrevocable Trust is an excluded resource or not. The dispositive issue on appeal in this case is whether there are any circumstances under which the trust's principal could be returned to the Appellant or used for her benefit.

In this case the court was asked to determine whether an annuity purchased by the community spouse for their sole benefit with funds in excess of the Community Spouse Resource Allowance after Appellee's institutionalization, but before his Medicaid eligibility determination constituted an improper transfer for purposes of qualifying for Medicaid.

In this discretionary appeal, the court was tasked with determining whether the Court of Appeals erred in upholding the decision of the Ohio Dept. of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) that the transfer of a home from an institutionalized spouse to a community spouse after a Medicaid spenddown, but before the eligibility determination was improper under Medicaid law. Also at issue are the penalties under 42 U.S.C 1396p(c)(1)(A) through (E) for improper transfers and whether they apply to this case.

At issue in this Medicaid case is whether an institutionalized individual receiving Medicaid-paid nursing home care lost the right to continuation of such care when, after receiving an inheritance, he immediately transferred the inherited assets to his wife, the community spouse.

The court was asked to consider whether the Court of Appeals properly interpreted 42 U.S.C. 12396p with respect to whether a Medicaid applicant's purchase of an annuity was subject to an asset transfer penalty.

At issue is whether the funds held by a community spouse in an IRA are countable resources for purposes of determining their institutionalized spouse's Medicaid eligibility, and whether a new Medicaid eligibility regulation can be applied retroactively to an applicant's already-submitted application.

At issue is whether the trial court abused its discretion when lifting the stay of proceedings, finding the worth of the institutionalized individual's estate to be greater than at the time of death, and dismissing the cause of action for a constructive trust.