Decided in the United States Court for the District of Utah, November 18, 2019 (Case No. 2:17-cv-00435-DN)
Plaintiff is challenging the medical necessity denial for mental health residential treatment in part because the Defendant is alleged to have used intermediate care criteria that parts from “generally accepted standards of care” when compared to medical/surgical care.
Court denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff in his second amended complaint sufficiently pleaded an “as-applied” Parity Act violation.