Sandefur v. Cherry
| Decision Date | 10 September 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-CQ-0083,84-CQ-0083 |
| Citation | 455 So.2d 1350 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | James D. SANDEFUR, O.D. and W.E. Marionneaux, Jr., O.D. v. William A. CHERRY, M.D., Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health & Human Resources and Bonnie Smith, Medical Services Director of the Louisiana Department of Health & Human Resources. |
Henry B. Bruser, III, Robert G. Nida, Gold, Little, Simon, Weems & Bruser, Alexander, for plaintiff-appellants.
Charles L. Patin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles E. Daspit, Frank H. Perez, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellees.
Plaintiffs, optometrists licensed to practice in Louisiana, brought this suit in federal court for injunctive and declaratory relief to have the Louisiana Medical Association Plan, its Program Manual and the practices and procedures thereunder reformed to comply with federal and state law.
The federal district court found in favor of the defendants, and dismissed the suit. Sandefur v. Cherry, 547 F.Supp. 418 (M.D.La.1982). The United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, certified a question to this court because the case "involves a determinative question of Louisiana law and there are no controlling state law precedents." Sandefur v. Cherry, 718 F.2d 682, 690 (5th Cir.1983).
Specifically, the plaintiffs argue that the state's practice of reimbursing ophthalmologists while not reimbursing optometrists for eye care services provided to medicaid eligible persons violates state law. R.S. 37:1066 and R.S. 49:185 both prohibit state officials from directly or indirectly limiting or restricting the freedom of patients to choose the services of an optometrist, physician or surgeon. 1
The parties to this suit entered into the following joint stipulation of facts and proposed certificate of questions:
"It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties hereto, for the purposes of the question to be certified to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, that:
1. The record in this case establishes that the State of Louisiana, under its Medical Assistance Plan-Medicaid, makes reimbursement to ophthalmologists for services which are within the scope of practice of optometrists, but does not make reimbursement to optometrists for performing those services to Medical eligible persons.
2. The question to be certified to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana should read:
Do the state employees and officials charged with adoption of the Louisiana Medical Assistance Plan, the Medical Assistance Program Manual, Providers' Manual and practices and procedures thereunder have discretion under R.S. 37:1066 and R.S. 49:185 to provide therein for provision of all eye care services to Medicaid eligible persons by ophthalmologists and other medical doctors to the exclusion of optometrists, except for routine eye examinations for eligible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Guarantee Trust Life Ins. Co. v. Gavin
...violates the equal protection clause Gavin cites Sandefur v. Cherry, 718 F.2d 682 (5th Cir.1983), certified question answered by, 455 So.2d 1350 (La.1984). Gavin's reliance on this case is misplaced. In Sandefur we held that a state medical plan which provided reimbursement to opthalmologis......
-
Sandefur v. Cherry
...by designation.1 Sandefur v. Cherry, 718 F.2d 682, 690 (5th Cir.1983).2 Sandefur v. Cherry, 721 F.2d 511 (5th Cir.1983).3 Sandefur v. Cherry, 455 So.2d 1350 (La.1984). ...
-
Chiropractic Ass'n of Louisiana v. State, Through Bd. of Trustees of State Employees Group Benefits Program
...incurred, said charges not to exceed $100 for any Covered Person per calendar month.3 Our opinion is strengthened by Sandefur v. Cherry, 455 So.2d 1350 (La.1984). In Sandefur, the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, certified a question to the Louisiana Supreme Court to determine......