Cases

COMPTON, Justice. This case arises out of a dispute between the State of Alaska and the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association (ASHNHA) over rates paid to nursing homes under the Medicaid program. The superior court granted ASHNHA judgment on the basis that the State’s plan violated the procedural requirements of the Boren Amendment. We affirm. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

OPINION No. 04-08-00079-CV IN RE ESTATE OF Belton Kleberg JOHNSON, Deceased From the Probate Court No 1, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2001-PC-1819 Honorable Polly Jackson Spencer, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

340 S.W.3d 769 (2011) In re ESTATE OF Belton Kleberg JOHNSON, Deceased. No. 04-08-00079-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. February 16, 2011. Rehearing Overruled April 18, 2011. *773 Joyce W. Moore, Langley & Banack, Inc., Seagal V. Wheatley, Jackson & Walker L.L.P., Ryan G. Anderson, McClenahan, Anderso

875 F.Supp. 891 (1995) SOUTH BOSTON ALLIED WAR VETERANS COUNCIL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF BOSTON, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 94-11402-MLW. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. January 17, 1995. *892 *893 *894 Chester Darling, Bosto

856 P.2d 755 (1993) The DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, State of Alaska, et al., Appellants, Cross-Appellees, v. ALASKA STATE HOSPITAL AND NURSING HOME ASSOCIATION, an Alaska non-profit corp., acting on its own behalf and on behalf of its membership, et al., Appellees, Cross-Appellants. S-4807. Supreme Court of Alaska. July 16, 1993.

724 F.Supp. 404 (1989) Lusby MOWBRAY, Sadie Mowbray, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Bruce U. KOZLOWSKI, individually and in his official capacity as Director of the Virginia Department of Medical Assistance, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 89-0014-H. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Harrisonburg Division. October

565 F.Supp. 1553 (1983) Rachel WETHERILL, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO and Eli Lilly and Company, Defendants. Maureen ROGERS, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO and Eli Lilly and Company, Defendants. Nos. 77 C 1434, 77 C 2485. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. June 17, 1983. *1554

NlMS, Judge: In these consolidated cases, respondent determined aggregate deficiencies in excess of $61 million in petitioners’ Federal income taxes for the years 1975 through 1980.2 Each of the petitioners in these cases entered into a series of transactions herein sometimes referred to for convenience as the London Options Transaction. Th

O’Brien, S. This trial of the issue of the status of a contestant in the pending probate proceeding began on October 19, 1931, and with the exception of a recess of one day in November, and of three and a half days in Christmas week occasioned by the death of decedent’s sister, continued without interruption until Monday, January 11, 1932, at two p. m.; 149 witnesses were called in the trial, 834 exhibits were marked in evidence a