Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Dralves Gene Edwards v Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas US Supreme Court Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Dralves Gene Edwards v Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas US Supreme Court Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Ratings: (0)|Views: 36 |Likes:
Published by Shirley Pigott MD

More info:

Published by: Shirley Pigott MD on Oct 05, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/05/2009

pdf

text

original

 
No. _________
================================================================
 In The
Supreme Court of the United States
---------------------------------
---------------------------------DR. DRALVES GENE EDWARDS,
 Petitioner,
v.BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF TEXAS, A DIVISION OF HEALTH CARE SERVICE CORP.,
 Respondent.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
On Petition For Writ Of CertiorariTo The Texas Court Of AppealsFor The Fifth District
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
---------------------------------
---------------------------------D
R
. D
RALVES
G
ENE
E
DWARDS
 Pro Se1532 Chapman StreetCedar Hill, TX 75104214-215-4425================================================================
 
i
QUESTION PRESENTED
 I. Whether the Texas Court of Appeals wrongly con-cluded (contrary to decisions from other federal andstate courts of appeals) that all state law claims forconsequential damages against Medicare fiscal inter-mediaries are preempted under the Medicare Act.
 
iiTABLE OF CONTENTSPageQUESTION PRESENTED................................... iTABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................. iiOPINIONS BELOW............................................. 1JURISDICTION ................................................... 1CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PRO- VISIONS INVOLVED ....................................... 1STATEMENT ....................................................... 4 A. The Medicare Act ....................................... 4B. Dr. Edwards’ claims under state law ........ 6C. The lower courts’ treatment of Edwards’state law claims ......................................... 9REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT ........... 11I. Courts are divided on whether theMedicare Act is the exclusive remedy forclaims against MACs ................................. 11II. The issue of whether collateral damagesmay be pursued against a MAC is of national importance .................................. 15III. The case presents no vehicle problems ..... 17IV. The Texas Court of Appeals’ decision wascontrary to this Court’s precedents anderroneous ................................................... 17CONCLUSION ..................................................... 25

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->