A Medicaid recipient's failure to file a timely appeal for review of a denial of Medicaid benefits does not preclude her from bringing a state court action seeking redress under § 1983 or the Americans with Disabilities Act. The exhaustion of all administrative remedies is not required, the court rules. King v. Indiana Family and Social Services (Ind. Ct. App., No. 57A04-0201-CV-47, Sept. 16, 2002).
Mellissa King has severe mental and physical disabilities and receives home care services paid for by Medicaid. In 1998, Ms. King requested that her services be increased from eight to ten hours per day. On September 17, 1999, she was notified that her services would instead be cut back to six hours per day. On November 27, 1999, Ms. King''s mother and guardian requested review by the Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA). The FSSA's administrative law judge dismissed Ms. King''s appeal on the ground that it had not been requested within thirty days of the agency's action.
Ms. King then filed an action in state court challenging the reduction in services under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The FSSA moved to dismiss, arguing that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the administrative appeal from the original September 17, 1999, decision had not been timely filed and therefore Ms. King had failed to exhaust all administrative remedies available within the agency. The trial court granted the FSSA's motion and Ms. King appealed.
The Court of Appeals of Indiana reverses, ruling that Ms. King was not required to exhaust all available administrative remedies before bringing a case in state court premised upon federal law. 'Federal substantive law controls, and any state laws or rules which inhibit the prosecution of a § 1983 action are preempted by the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution,' the court writes.
To download the full-text of this decision, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
