Case Detail
Case Title | Consumers Council of Missouri v. Department of Health and Human Services | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | Eastern District of Missouri | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | St. Louis | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 4:2014cv01682 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2014-09-30 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2015-04-23 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | District Judge Jean C. Hamilton | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | Consumers Council of Missouri | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Description | The Consumers Council of Missouri submitted a FOIA request to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for records concerning the companies offering insurance in Missouri under the Affordable Care Act, the rates charged, and any non-exempt information filed by the insurers. The Council also requested expedited processing and a fee waiver. After hearing nothing further from the agency, the Council filed suit. Complaint issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Public Interest Fee Waiver, Litigation - Attorney's fees | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | Department of Health and Human Services Mary Mayhew Commissioner of DHHS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appeal | Eighth Circuit 15-3595 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Complaint attachment 4 Complaint attachment 5 Complaint attachment 6 Opinion/Order [25] FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in Missouri has ruled that Consumers Council of Missouri's FOIA request to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for records pertaining to the names of insurers offering health insurance in Missouri in 2015, their 2015 rates, and non-commercial information provided in their Rate Filing Justifications is moot because the agency ultimately furnished the agency website address where such information could be located. Consumers Council argued the request was not moot because it was capable of repetition, yet evading review. The court noted that "in this case it is plausible, if not likely, that Plaintiff will request similar information in future years. There nevertheless does not exist a reasonable expectation that Plaintiff will be subjected to the same delayed response, however [because] CMS will not have to go through the time-consuming pre-disclosure notification process. . .that it engaged in this time, prior to posting the information to its website in future years" and because HHS is adopting new regulations beginning in plan year 2016. As a result, the court observed that "in light of these prospects for change with respect to the release of information for plan years 2016 and beyond, the Court agrees with HHS that at this point, Plaintiff has not basis to contend it will be subject to the same alleged injury."
Opinion/Order [40]Issues: Litigation - Jurisdiction - Moot FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in Missouri has ruled that the Consumers Council of Missouri did not substantially prevail in its suit against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and is not entitled to attorney's fees. Consumers Council requested the 2015 insurers' filing rates for Missouri in August 2014. The agency told Consumers Council that it was working on the request but could not respond within 20 days. Consumer Council filed suit in September 2014. The agency disclosed some of the records responsive to Consumers Council's request on its website in November 2014. Consumers Council then filed its motion for summary judgment asking the court to order the agency to disclose the remainder of the records immediately. CMS disclosed the rest of the records responsive to Consumer Council's request in March 2015. The court then denied Consumers Council's motion for summary judgment as moot. Consumers Council filed a motion for attorney's fees, asking for $139,852. Denying the motion, the court noted that "the record reveals Defendant did not voluntarily or unilaterally change its position in response to this lawsuit. Instead, CMS initiated its pre-disclosure notification process for information in Part I of the 2015 [rate filings] and simultaneously began developing a new website to publicly post the information in Parts I and II that were determined to be made public, in May, 2014â€"months before Plaintiff submitted its FOIA request. While CMS did not initiate the pre-disclosure notification process with respect to Part III information until November 7, 2014, there is no indication that it did so in response to Plaintiff's lawsuit, rather than as part of its consistent action to comply with its own regulations." Consumers Council contended that the agency had changed its position by agreeing to post all non-confidential rate filings by the tenth business day after May 15. But the court pointed out that "Defendant presents evidence, however, that CMS set the uniform [rate filing] submission and public posting deadlines for policy reasons unrelated to this litigation."
Issues: Litigation - Attorney's fees - Prevailing party | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|