In Re Estate of Darby
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-00335-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CA-00335-COA ; 2010-CT-00335-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-22-2011 Opinion Author: King, C.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Medicaid reimbursement - Right to recover - 42 U.S.C. §1396p(b) - Section 43-13-317 - Exempt property - Section 43-13-317 - Section 85-3-21 - Section 91-1-19 - Homestead exemption - Waiver Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Dissenting Author : Irving, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-26-2010 Appealed from: DESOTO COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: MITCHELL M. LUNDY JR. Disposition: GRANTED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF LINDA DARBY STINSON, EXECUTRIX; DENIED MEDICAID’S CLAIM AS CREDITOR OF THE ESTATE Case Number: 09-06-1179 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | In the Matter of the Estate of Arlyn E. Darby, Deceased: Office of the Governor, Mississippi Division of Medicaid, and State of Mississippi |
WILLIAM HARRIS MOUNGER JR., CHARLES PALMER QUARTERMAN |
|
|
| Appellee: | Linda Darby Stinson, Executrix | RALPH EDWIN CHAPMAN, JOSEPH HARLAND WEBSTER, ROBERT LAWSON HOLLADAY | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Medicaid reimbursement - Right to recover - 42 U.S.C. §1396p(b) - Section 43-13-317 - Exempt property - Section 43-13-317 - Section 85-3-21 - Section 91-1-19 - Homestead exemption - Waiver |
| Summary of the Facts: | Arlyn Darby was a resident of the Sardis Community Nursing Home at the time of his death. Darby had been receiving Medicaid benefits while he was a resident of the nursing home. At the time of his death, Darby owned his house and a small amount of personal property. The value of his homestead did not exceed $75,000 and the value of his personal property did not exceed $10,000. The property was devised to his children and one grandchild. The Division of Medicaid filed a probate claim against the estate. The claim of $123,716.13, represented the total amount Medicaid expended for Darby’s medical care after he reached the age of fifty-five. Linda Darby Stinson, Darby’s daughter and executrix of the estate, filed an objection to the probated claim asserting that the property Darby owned was exempt property and not subject to Medicaid’s claim. Stinson filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. The Division of Medicaid appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Entitlement to reimbursement There is no dispute of Medicaid’s right to recover its expenses from the property of a recipient’s estate. 42 U.S.C. §1396p(b) requires states to seek recovery of nursing home services, home and community- based services and related hospital and prescription drug services from the estate of a deceased Medicaid recipient who was fifty-five years of age or older when the assistance was received. The governing statute in Mississippi is section 43-13-317. Issue 2: Exempt property 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(b)(4)(B) clearly permits each state to specifically define what assets are included within an estate for purposes of Medicaid recovery. A number of states have expanded the definition of estate to allow recovery beyond probate assets. Not only are states permitted to expand the assets included in a beneficiary’s estate, but many states allow liens to be placed on real property even before the death of the Medicaid recipient. There are very few states that limit estate recovery until after the beneficiary’s death while also limiting recovery from assets within the probate estate; Mississippi is a member of this category. Section 43-13-317 permitting estate recovery does not expand the definition of estate and provides that recovery is permitted in accordance with applicable federal law. The applicable federal statute permits Medicaid to recover from those assets of Darby’s that pass through probate according to Mississippi law. Neither party disputes that Darby’s real property qualified as his homestead exemption pursuant to section 85-3-21. The descent of exempt property is governed by section 91-1-19. The supreme court has interpreted this statute to allow those entitled, including spouse, children and grandchildren, to inherit the exempt property in fee simple free of the decedent’s debts. Section 91-1-21 provides that exempt property is not liable for the debt of the decedent if there is a surviving spouse, children or grandchildren. The supreme court has held that the specific language of section 91-1-21 continues a decedent’s homestead exemption for a surviving spouse, children or grandchildren. Therefore, Darby’s children and grandchild are entitled to inherit the exempt property free of his debts. Thus, Medicaid is not entitled to pursue a claim against the exempted property as it is not a part of the estate. Issue 3: Waiver Medicaid argues that Stinson waived the exemption when she entered into a contractual relationship with Medicaid on behalf of Darby in order to become eligible for benefits. A waiver is defined as a voluntary surrender or relinquishment of some known right, benefit or advantage. The record does not support the idea that Darby had any knowledge of the benefits a homestead exemption provided, nor that he intentionally waived his right to the benefit of that exemption. The contract does not provide any information pertaining to, or even mention, the significance of any exemption. Also, there is no evidence of Darby’s intent to waive any of his rights. By entering into the contract, Darby merely acknowledged Medicaid as a creditor of his estate. Unfortunately, Darby’s estate has no property against which Medicaid may recover. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
