925 F.2d 1454 (Fed. Cir. 1991), 90-5092, Woods Psychiatric Institute v. United States

Docket Nº:90-5092.
Citation:925 F.2d 1454
Party Name:WOODS PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.
Case Date:February 25, 1991
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1454

925 F.2d 1454 (Fed. Cir. 1991)

WOODS PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 90-5092.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

February 25, 1991

Appealed from: U.S. Claims Court; Robert J. Yock, Judge.

Patric Hooper, Hooper, Lundy & Bookman, Inc., Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for plaintiff-appellant.

Richard P. Nockett, Atty., Commercial Litigation Branch, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., argued, for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were Stuart M. Gerson, Asst. Atty. Gen., David M. Cohen, Director and Sharon Y. Eubanks, Asst. Director. Also on the brief was Roberta R. Herrick, Asst. Gen. Counsel, OCHAMPUS, of counsel.

Before NIES, Chief Judge, SKELTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and RADER, Circuit Judge.

NIES, Chief Judge.

Woods Psychiatric Institute appeals the judgment of the United States Claims Court which concluded that the final decision of the Director of the Civilian Health and Medical Program for the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) was not arbitrary or capricious, was based on substantial evidence and was correct as a matter of law. Woods Psychiatric Inst. v. United States, 20 Cl.Ct. 324 (1990). Specifically, the Claims Court in a detailed analysis determined that two CHAMPUS regulations, 32 C.F.R. Secs. 199.10(b)(1)(iv) and 199.10(f)(5) (1985), [*] are procedurally and substantively valid, that the alleged untimeliness of

Page 1455

CHAMPUS's actions in recouping overpayments did not unduly prejudice Woods, and that CHAMPUS's recoupment actions were not barred by the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP