An Indiana appeals court holds that the doctrine of necessaries does not entitle a nursing home resident's community spouse to an increased CSRA where the resident had not yet applied for Medicaid and the request was based on speculation as to the couple's future financial needs. Roupp v. Roupp (Ind. App. No. 41A01-1007-MI-335, April 25, 2011) (unpublished).
Before nursing home resident Margaret Roupp applied for Medicaid benefits, her husband, Robert, filed a petition against her seeking spousal support pursuant to Medicaid's spousal impoverishment rules and the common law doctrine of necessaries. The state's Medicaid agency intervened and moved to dismiss the case. The trial court found that Mr. Roupp's expenses exceeded his income and, relying on the doctrine of necessaries, it increased his community spouse resource allowance (CSRA) to make up the shortfall. The agency appealed.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana finds the doctrine of necessaries inapplicable and reverses. The court states the doctrine applies to compel the distribution of assets from a financially superior spouse to a dependent spouse when the dependent spouse's separate funds are insufficient to meet his needs. Here, Mr. Roupp was in the financially superior position and "the trial court's order [was] fatally premised on improper speculation regarding Margaret's future qualification for Medicaid and the Roupp's future financial needs."
To download the full text of this decision in PDF format, go to: https://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/04251102mgr.pdf.
(If you do not have the free PDF reader installed on your computer, download it here.)
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 1,800 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
