South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

CAPTION:
Shawn Drawdy vs. SCDHHS

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services

PARTIES:
Appellant:
Shawn Drawdy

Respondent:
South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
05-ALJ-08-0090-CC

APPEARANCES:
n/a
 

ORDERS:

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Shawn Drawdy,


Appellant,




vs.





South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services,


Respondent.


)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)


Docket No. 05-ALJ-08-0090-CC







ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Shawn Drawdy (Drawdy) seeks benefits from Medicaid under the Aged, Blind or Disabled (ABD) program. Having no success in pressing a claim before the South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Drawdy now brings this matter on appeal to the Administrative Law Court (ALC).

In response to the appeal, HHS filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that the ALC lacks jurisdiction since Drawdy presented the same claim to the Social Security Administration (SSA) and that body denied the benefits requested. Given such facts, I conclude jurisdiction is lacking in the ALC and that Drawdy’s appeal must be dismissed.

HHS is not free to disregard disability determinations made by the SSA. Rather, when SSA has made a determination of no disability, HHS may not make an independent finding on that same issue since the SSA determination is binding on HHS. 42 CFR § 435.541(b)(1)(I). See Sebastian v. Commissioner of Human Services, 1993 WL 642701 (M.D.Tenn. 1993) ("Specifically, if the Social Security Administration (SSA) has made a determination of non-disability for SSI benefits purposes, then the state agency must defer to this decision and cannot redetermine Medicaid eligibility on disability."). Indeed, these same federal regulations have been judged to show an intent "that the federal agency's determination of nondisability supersedes [even] a previous state agency determination of disability." Disabled Rights Union v. Kizer 744 F.Supp. 221 (Cal. 1990).

Thus, since Drawdy presented the same claim to the Social Security Administration (SSA) and that body denied the benefits requested, the federal regulations deny the state the decision making authority in the instant case.

THEREFORE, this matter must be dismissed due to controlling federal regulations.


AND IT IS SO ORDERED

______________________

RAY N. STEVENS

Administrative Law Judge

Dated: March 29, 2005

Columbia, South Carolina


Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2022 South Carolina Administrative Law Court