Swinomish Loses Contract Support Costs Dispute with Indian Health Service

Here are the materials in Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Azar (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

21-2 Swinomish MSJ

27 US Cross-Motion

29 Swinomish Reply

32 US Reply

36 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The question in this case is whether, when a tribe collects its own third-party revenue pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1641(d)(1), its expenditures of those funds on health care services are eligible for CSC funding from the IHS under the ISDEAA, id. §§ 5325, 5388.

Materials in Cook Inlet Tribal Council Suit against Indian Health Service

Here are the materials in Cook Inlet Tribal Council v. Mandregan (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

13-1 Tribe MSJ

15 IHS Cross MSJ

18 Tribe Reply

21 IHS Reply

39 DCT Order

40 Tribe Bill of Costs

41 Tribe Motion for Atty Fees

42 IHS Response to 40

43 IHS Motion for Reconsideration

44 Tribe Reply in Support of 41

51 Tribe Cross Motion for Reconsideration

58 IHS Response to 41

60 IHS Reply in Support of 43

61 Tribe Reply in Support of 41

65 DCT Order

Navajo Nation Seeks Proposals to Assist with Claims for Unpaid Contract Support Costs

Here:

The Navajo Nation Department of Justice seeks outside counsel assistance in pursuing the Navajo Nation’s claims for unpaid contract support costs from P.L. 93-638 contracts entered into with the Indian Health Service (IHS).  This would include developing claims for unpaid contract support costs, entering into settlement negotiations with IHS and, if necessary, making recommendations to the Attorney General for litigation of those claims if a negotiated settlement cannot be reached.  Qualifications include experience in and knowledge of Federal Indian law, especially the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA), P.L. 93-638, as amended, and experience filing claims for payment of contract support costs pursuant to the ISDEAA. 

Proposals must be received by email by the Navajo Nation Department of Justice by no later than 5:00 PM MT on September 16, 2016.  NO LATE PROPOSALS WILL BE ACCEPTED.

2016-08-29 – IHS CSC Counsel_Final RFP

Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin v. United States Materials

Here are the materials in Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin v. United States.

Supreme Court Merits Briefs

Menominee Tribe Brief

NCAI Amicus Brief

US Brief

Menominee Reply

Cert Stage Briefs

Cert Petition

US Brief

D.C. Circuit Materials

DC Circuit Opinion

Menominee Opening Brief 2013

IHS Brief

Menominee Reply Brief

District Court Materials

DCT Order Dismissing Menominee Claims

IHS Motion to Dismiss

Menominee Motion for Summary J

Earlier D.C. Circuit Materials

DC Circuit Opinion 2010

 

Decision in Navajo Health Foundation — Sage Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Burwell

Here are the materials in Navajo Health Foundation – Sage Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Burwell (D. N.M.):

27 Sage Motion for Summary J

48 IHS Response

53 Sage Reply

73 DCT Opinion

From the opinion:

Finally, the Court will grant the MSJ on two grounds. First, the Court will deem the Claim denied, because Dayish has not given Sage Hospital a “date certain” by which he will decide the Claim; rather, he conditioned his October 21, 2015, deadline upon Sage Hospital’s cooperation. Second, even if Dayish had given Sage Hospital a date certain by which he will decide the Claim, his proposed fourteen-month period for deciding the Claim is unreasonably long under the CDA. [4]  Accordingly, even if the Court did not deem the Claim already denied, it would order Dayish to approve or deny the Claim by July 25, 2015.

 

Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe Complaint for Contract Support Costs from IHS

Here is the complaint in Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Burwell (E.D. Mich.):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

This is a suit against the United States for breach of contract and statute by the Indian Health Service (“IHS”), an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) (collectively “Defendants”). The Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan (“Tribe”) seeks money damages under the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act, 25 U.S.C. §§ 450 – 458ddd-2 (“ISDEAA”) and the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101 – 7109 (“CDA”) for the Defendants’ continued and repeated violation of the Tribe’s contractual and statutory right to the payment of full contract support costs (“CSC”) for fiscal year 2006.

Payment of Contract Support Costs is Mandatory – Why Isn’t the Funding?

Attorneys from Hobbs Strauss have prepared a proposal to enact permanent mandatory funding appropriations for contract support costs under the ISDEAA. The proposal is here:

White Paper and Proposal – Final

They also have an editorial in the ICT on this matter.

Federal Court Denies Government’s Motion to Dismiss Tuba City Regional’s Contract Support Costs Claims against IHS

Here are the materials in Tuba City Regional Health Care Corp. v. United States (D.D.C.):

18-1 US Motion to Dismiss

19 Tuba City Opposition

20 US Reply

32 DCT Order Denying US Motion to Dismiss

 

Winslow Indian Health Care Center Inc. v. United States Complaint

Here:

01 Complaint

An excerpt:

This is a suit against the United States for breach of contract and statute by the Indian Health Service (“IHS”), an agency in the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”). Plaintiff, the Winslow Indian Health Care Center (“WIHCC”), seeks money damages under the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq. (“CDA”), based on the Secretary’s repeated violations of WIHCC’s contractual and statutory right to the payment of full funding of contract support costs (“CSC”) for contracts entered under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (“ISDEAA”), Pub. L. No. 93-638, as amended, 25 U.S.C. § 450 et seq.