Matranga v. Travelers Ins. Co., 77-1120
| Decision Date | 18 November 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-1120,77-1120 |
| Citation | 563 F.2d 677 |
| Parties | E. J. MATRANGA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. The TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Robert E. Hauberg, U. S. Atty., Joseph E. Brown, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Jackson, Miss., for defendant-appellant.
Fred A. Ross, Jr., Jackson, Miss., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.
Before COLEMAN and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges, and NIXON, * District Judge.
The Travelers Insurance Company, defendant below, is a contract carrier through which the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare administers the Medicare Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395c-1395qq (1970) (amended 1976). Travelers brings this interlocutory appeal, 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), from the district court's denial of its motion for summary judgment, contending that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Travelers under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. We agree and direct the district court to enter judgment for the appellant.
Dr. E. J. Matranga, a podiatrist in Jackson, Mississippi, filed this action on the theory that Travelers was liable to him for willful and wanton misconduct in processing Medicare claims that he had submitted to Travelers to cover professional services rendered to nursing home patients. Travelers' misconduct was alleged to be the improper withholding of payments to Dr. Matranga and the referral of his case to the Social Security Administration for investigation.
We held in Peterson v. Weinberger, 508 F.2d 45, 51-52 (5th Cir. 1975), and Peterson v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Texas, 508 F.2d 55 (5th Cir. 1975), that the district court lacks jurisdiction over such Medicare fiscal intermediaries as Travelers under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The Medicare Act authorizes the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare to provide for the administration of the Act through contract "carriers." 42 U.S.C. § 1395u (1970) (amended 1976). Travelers is such a carrier. Although Travelers makes determinations of amounts to be paid on claims and disburses funds provided by the government, the United States is the real party in interest. 20 C.F.R. § 405.670 (1977).
Travelers was acting under the direction of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare and there is nothing in the record to indicate that Travelers was acting outside the perimeters of its official duties in its dealings...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Serra v. US General Services Admin.
...is the real party in interest. See Helash v. Ballard, 638 F.2d 74, 76 (9th Cir.1980) (per curiam); Matranga v. Travelers Ins. Co., 563 F.2d 677, 677-78 (5th Cir.1977) (per curiam). Only where Congress has given explicit authority for a federal agency to be sued eo nomine may such a suit be ......
-
Brooks v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc.
...not provide for any action against an administrator or "fiscal intermediary" that is not itself the insurer. See Matranga v. Travelers Ins. Co., 563 F.2d 677, 677 (5th Cir.1977) (holding that in action seeking payment from Medicare for services rendered the Court lacks subject matter jurisd......
-
U.S. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc.
...C.F.R. § 421.5(b) (1997), and the federal courts have extended the doctrine of sovereign immunity to them. See Matranga v. Travelers Ins. Co., 563 F.2d 677, 677-78 (5th Cir.1977) (justifying extension of the doctrine because the United States is the real party in interest); Peterson v. Blue......
-
Pani v. Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield
...curiam) (claim for negligent infliction of mental anguish by medicare carrier barred by sovereign immunity); Matranga v. Travelers Ins. Co., 563 F.2d 677 (5th Cir.1977) (per curiam) (sovereign immunity prevented action against intermediary for alleged misconduct in processing claims); Peter......