In this case, a Medicaid application filed by the beneficiary of a special needs trust was denied by the Medicaid agency and upheld on appeal because the special needs trust, funded with the proceeds from a personal injury lawsuit but lacking a Medicaid payback provision, violated applicable law. D.W. v. Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div., No. A-2092-13T4, Dec. 2, 2015).
D.W., a twenty-nine- year-old developmentally disabled man who resided in a group home, applied for a Medicaid waiver program. The New Jersey Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services (DMAHS) denied D.W.’s Medicaid application. DMAHS found that D.W. was the beneficiary of a self-settled special needs trust (SNT) which did not contain a Medicaid payback provision. The SNT, created by a New Jersey trial court in 2008, was funded with $278,389.28 recovered in a personal injury lawsuit filed by D.W. Based upon the SNT’s missing payback provision, DMAHS denied Medicaid eligibility, finding the SNT did not “meet the Special Needs Trust Guidelines in accordance with Medicaid regulations.”
D.W. filed an administrative appeal, seeking a fair hearing. The administrative law judge (ALJ) hearing the case found that a self-funded SNT “must meet specific requirements,” chief among them the inclusion of a payback provision insuring “repayment to the State of an amount equal to the total amount of medical assistance, if any, which is paid to D.W. under the State Medicaid Plan.” Because D.W.’s SNT lacked a payback provision, the ALJ found DMAHS was correct in denying D.W.’s Medicaid application. The Director of DMAHS adopted the ALJ’s decision.
D.W. appealed to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. On appeal, D.W. argued that his SNT did not require a payback provision because the SNT was irrevocable and the beneficiary did not have the right to compel distributions. As a result, according to D.W., DMAHS erred in classifying his SNT as a countable resource for Medicaid eligibility purposes. In response, DMAHS contended that, because D.W.’s SNT was funded with his own assets, it is a first-party, self-settled trust which must contain a payback provision under Medicaid law.
The appellate court affirmed the denial of D.W.’s Medicaid application. The court found that the “critical issue here for ‘Medicaid eligibility purposes is who established the trust.’”… Because there is no question but that D.W.’s own assets recovered from a personal injury lawsuit were used to fund the trust, the law is clear that his is a self-settled trust which must [contain a payback provision] to be considered an excludable resource. Because D.W.’s trust admittedly lacks the payback provision required by those enactments, the Director was correct to conclude it is an available resource rendering him ineligible for Medicaid.
To read the full text of the court’s opinion, go to: D.W. v. Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services
For additional information concerning special needs trusts and disability planning, visit: https://vanarellilaw.com/special-needs-disability-planning/
For additional information concerning Medicaid applications and appeals, visit: https://vanarellilaw.com/medicaid-applications-medicaid-appeals/
Categories
- Affordable Care Act
- Alzheimer's Disease
- Arbitration
- Attorney Ethics
- Attorneys Fees
- Beneficiary Designations
- Blog Roundup and Highlights
- Blogs and Blogging
- Care Facilities
- Caregivers
- Cemetery
- Collaborative Family Law
- Conservatorships
- Consumer Fraud
- Contempt
- Contracts
- Defamation
- Developmental Disabilities
- Discovery
- Discrimination Laws
- Doctrine of Probable Intent
- Domestic Violence
- Elder Abuse
- Elder Law
- Elective Share
- End-of-Life Decisions
- Estate Administration
- Estate Litigation
- Estate Planning
- Events
- Family Law
- Fiduciary
- Financial Exploitation of the Elderly
- Funeral
- Future of the Legal Profession
- Geriatric Care Managers
- Governmental or Public Benefit Programs
- Guardianship
- Health Issues
- Housing for the Elderly and Disabled
- In Remembrance
- Insolvent Estates
- Institutional Liens
- Insurance
- Interesting New Cases
- Intestacy
- Law Firm News
- Law Firm Videos
- Law Practice Management / Development
- Lawyers and Lawyering
- Legal Capacity or Competancy
- Legal Malpractice
- Legal Rights of the Disabled
- Liens
- Litigation
- Mediation
- Medicaid Appeals
- Medicaid Applications
- Medicaid Planning
- Annuities
- Care Contracts
- Divorce
- Estate Recovery
- Family Part Non-Dissolution Support Orders
- Gifts
- Life Estates
- Loan repayments
- MMMNA
- Promissory Notes
- Qualified Income Trusts
- Spousal Refusal
- Transfers For Reasons Other Than To Qualify For Medicaid
- Transfers to "Caregiver" Child(ren)
- Transfers to Disabled Adult Children
- Trusts
- Undue Hardship Provision
- Multiple-Party Deposit Account Act
- New Cases
- New Laws
- News Briefs
- Newsletters
- Non-Probate Assets
- Nursing Facility Litigation
- Personal Achievements and Awards
- Personal Injury Lawsuits
- Probate
- Punitive Damages
- Reconsideration
- Retirement Benefits
- Reverse Mortgages
- Section 8 Housing
- Settlement of Litigation
- Social Media
- Special Education
- Special Needs Planning
- Surrogate Decision-Making
- Taxation
- Technology
- Texting
- Top Ten
- Trials
- Trustees
- Uncategorized
- Veterans Benefits
- Web Sites and the Internet
- Webinar
- Writing Intended To Be A Will
Vanarelli & Li, LLC on Social Media