{
  "id": 6057806,
  "name": "Rush Anesthesiology Group and Gupta Garlan, M.D., Claimants, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Rush Anesthesiology Group v. State",
  "decision_date": "1983-04-14",
  "docket_number": "No. 82-CC-1580",
  "first_page": "851",
  "last_page": "853",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "35 Ill. Ct. Cl. 851"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 221,
    "char_count": 3001,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.883,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.2685155071500109e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7834972231971825
    },
    "sha256": "d509ed674ea9f1471948e097fbbc2d748a391d6da828a31bc01696e6f3d08642",
    "simhash": "1:537bf553891cef23",
    "word_count": 479
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:23:43.791876+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Rush Anesthesiology Group and Gupta Garlan, M.D., Claimants, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Poch, J.\nThis cause coming on to be heard on the motion of Respondent to dismiss, due notice having been given and the Claimants not filing any response thereto, and the Court being fully advised finds as follows:\n1. That Claimants, Dr. Garla, a medical vendor, and the Rush Group, are seeking payment from the Illinois Department of Public Aid (IDPA) for medical services rendered by the doctor during November and December 1979, to an infant ward of the Department of Children and Family Services.\n2. That, as fully set forth in IDPA\u2019s department report, which is prima facie evidence of the facts therein set forth, Dr. Garla\u2019s December services were billed to IDPA within one month after the services were rendered; however, the bill was rejected for payment, as it failed to identify the patient as IDPA\u2019s Medical Assistance Program (MAP). Claimants\u2019 bill for such services was later corrected, and has since been approved for payment and paid by IDPA.\n3. Claimants acknowledge they have no evidence that the doctor\u2019s November 1979 services were ever billed to IDPA on IDPA-prescribed forms, as required by Department Rule 4.015, D.R. Exhibit R-2. This rule (the requirements of which, also appear in IDPA\u2019s MAP Handbook for Physicians, D.R. Exhibit R-3, as distributed to all MAP participating physicians), also imposes certain limitations on the State\u2019s payment responsibility for such services. Among these is a limit on the period of time, following rendition of services, during which a vendor must bill such services to IDPA in order for the State to be liable for payment.\n4. Claimants were thus made aware of the aforementioned requirements, but have failed to document that the November services were ever billed to IDPA. IDPA\u2019s six-month deadline for Claimants\u2019 initial submittal of a bill for the November services has passed long prior to the commencement of this action. Accordingly, this claim is now ripe for final consideration and adjudication by the Court.\n5. A vendor\u2019s claim to a vendor payment, enforceable under section 11 \u2014 13 of the Public Aid Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 23, par. 11 \u2014 13), may be \u201climited by regulations of the Illinois Department.\u201d The above-mentioned regulation (department rule) imposes requirements which Claimants must meet if they are to receive a vendor payment for Dr. Carla\u2019s November services. Claimants have not met such requirements.\n6. That payment of this claim would be contrary to the above-mentioned regulation.\nIt is hereby ordered that the subject claim be, and is hereby dismissed, Claimants having been fully paid for the December services and having failed to demonstrate an entitlement to payment for the November services.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Poch, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Rush Anesthesiology Group, pro se, for Claimant.",
      "Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Kathleen O\u2019Brien, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 82-CC-1580\nRush Anesthesiology Group and Gupta Garlan, M.D., Claimants, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOrder filed April 14, 1983.\nRush Anesthesiology Group, pro se, for Claimant.\nNeil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Kathleen O\u2019Brien, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0851-01",
  "first_page_order": 1009,
  "last_page_order": 1011
}