Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, No. 90-2320

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore K.K. HALL and MURNAGHAN; PER CURIAM
PartiesUnpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. METROLINA FAMILY PRACTICE GROUP, P.A., the Durwood Medical Clinic, Incorporated, North Mecklenburg Family Practice Group, P.A., Thomas Dunlin, M.D., Charlotte Medical Clinic, P.A., Ralph V. Kidd, M.D., Mecklenburg Medical Group, P.A., Travis Medical Clinic, P.A., Kouri Medical Clinic, P.A., Charlotte Internal Medicine Associates, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Defendants-Appellees.
Decision Date25 March 1991
Docket NumberNo. 90-2320

Page 693

929 F.2d 693
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
METROLINA FAMILY PRACTICE GROUP, P.A., the Durwood Medical
Clinic, Incorporated, North Mecklenburg Family Practice
Group, P.A., Thomas Dunlin, M.D., Charlotte Medical Clinic,
P.A., Ralph V. Kidd, M.D., Mecklenburg Medical Group, P.A.,
Travis Medical Clinic, P.A., Kouri Medical Clinic, P.A.,
Charlotte Internal Medicine Associates, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services,
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 90-2320.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued Oct. 29, 1990.
Decided March 25, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina at Charlotte. James B. McMillan, Senior District Judge. (CA-88-436-C-C-M)

William L. Auten, Charlotte, N.C. (Argued), for appellants; Stanley A. Gertzman, Charlotte, N.C., on brief.

Bruce G. Forrest, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (Argued), for appellees; Stuart M. Gerson, Assistant Attorney General, Barbara C. Biddle, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., Thomas J. Ashcraft, United States Attorney, Charlotte, N.C., on brief.

W.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before K.K. HALL and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and JOSEPH H. YOUNG, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs are doctors or practitioners' groups who render physicians' services under Part B of the Medicare program. The plaintiffs have sought to attack statutory provisions limiting and placing ceilings on what they may charge Medicare patients. The plaintiffs' complaint, as amended, presents a facial constitutional challenge to seven provisions of Medicare Part B. There are no disputed facts. The case raises only two issues, and was, on cross motions for summary judgment, decided in favor of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. First, there is a question of standing vel non. Second, whether older notions of liberty of contract and of the proper role of federal government power which have fallen out of favor are to be resuscitated.

The government has argued that the doctors lack...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • Bond v. United States, No. 09–1227.
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 16, 2011
    ...185 F.3d 693, 700–704 (C.A.7 1999) ; Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, 767 F.Supp. 1314 (W.D.N.C.1989), aff'd 929 F.2d 693 (C.A.4 1991) ; Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. United States Dept. of Energy, 666 F.2d 1359, 1368, n. 16 (C.A.11 1982) ; see also United States v. Johnson, 63......
  • Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis PD., No. 98-2691
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • July 9, 1999
    ...U.S. 836, 103 S. Ct. 81 (1982); and Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sulliva- n, 767 F. Supp. 1314, 1320 (W.D. N.C. 1989), aff'd, 929 F.2d 693 (4th Cir.) (unpublished), text in Westlaw, 1991 WL 38691 (all finding individual standing to make Tenth Amendment claims), with Costle, 630 ......
  • Dillard v. Baldwin County Comm'r, No. 99-12251
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • September 8, 2000
    ...party "may be seriously questioned"); Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, 767 F.Supp. 1314, 1320 (W.D.N.C.1989), aff'd, 929 F.2d 693 (4th Cir.1991). 2. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act provides: "No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice, or pr......
  • Hunter v. Chiles, No. 95-6881-CIV.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Southern District of Florida
    • October 24, 1996
    ...as a condition of receiving the federal funds. Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, 767 F.Supp. 1314 (W.D.N.C. 1989), aff'd, 929 F.2d 693 (4th Cir.1991) (finding that Congressional control of federal funds is a valid exercise of the power of Congress under the Spending Clause)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • Bond v. United States, No. 09–1227.
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 16, 2011
    ...185 F.3d 693, 700–704 (C.A.7 1999) ; Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, 767 F.Supp. 1314 (W.D.N.C.1989), aff'd 929 F.2d 693 (C.A.4 1991) ; Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. United States Dept. of Energy, 666 F.2d 1359, 1368, n. 16 (C.A.11 1982) ; see also United States v. Johnson, 63......
  • Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis PD., No. 98-2691
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • July 9, 1999
    ...U.S. 836, 103 S. Ct. 81 (1982); and Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sulliva- n, 767 F. Supp. 1314, 1320 (W.D. N.C. 1989), aff'd, 929 F.2d 693 (4th Cir.) (unpublished), text in Westlaw, 1991 WL 38691 (all finding individual standing to make Tenth Amendment claims), with Costle, 630 ......
  • Dillard v. Baldwin County Comm'r, No. 99-12251
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • September 8, 2000
    ...party "may be seriously questioned"); Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, 767 F.Supp. 1314, 1320 (W.D.N.C.1989), aff'd, 929 F.2d 693 (4th Cir.1991). 2. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act provides: "No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice, or pr......
  • Hunter v. Chiles, No. 95-6881-CIV.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Southern District of Florida
    • October 24, 1996
    ...as a condition of receiving the federal funds. Metrolina Family Practice Group, P.A. v. Sullivan, 767 F.Supp. 1314 (W.D.N.C. 1989), aff'd, 929 F.2d 693 (4th Cir.1991) (finding that Congressional control of federal funds is a valid exercise of the power of Congress under the Spending Clause)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT