Kansas
Kansas court sides with Stormont Vail in Medicaid payment dispute
Stormont Vail Healthcare is in a legal battle with the state government, alleging the Medicaid program was wrong to refuse payment for the hospitalization of a pregnant patient with complications.
At issue is a disagreement between the Topeka hospital and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment over whether inpatient health care services were medically necessary for the Medicaid patient’s last two weeks of pregnancy.
The Kansas Court of Appeals did not resolve that dispute, but it did side with Stormont Vail in a May 8 decision. The unanimous three-judge panel reversed a decision by Shawnee County District Court Judge Thomas Luedke and vacated an order from KDHE’s State Appeals Committee. The matter now goes back to the appeals committee for reconsideration.
The appellate panel was comprised of Judges Jacy Hurst, Thomas Malone and Stephen Hill, which heard oral arguments on Aug. 5. Hurst wrote the court’s opinion.
The lawsuit stems from a 2018 case of a pregnant patient, who is not named in appellate court documents. She was 28 years old at the time and had an intellectual disability among other complications, including rapid weight loss caused by hyperemesis gravidarum.
The woman was originally admitted at Newman Regional Health in Emporia before she was transferred to Stormont Vail. Part of the hospitalization during her third trimester was covered.
But the final two weeks were not because Sunflower Health Plan, one of the managed care organizations in the state’s privatized Medicaid program known as KanCare, refused to reimburse for the patient’s continued hospitalization through the day the child was born via cesarean section.
“We are here because the Kansas Medicaid program has wrongfully refused to pay for some of an inpatient hospitalization while a Medicaid beneficiary was at Stormont Vail,” said Amanda Wilwert, an attorney for the hospital, during oral arguments. “Stormont believes the inpatient care was medically necessary as defined by the Kansas Medicaid regulations.”
Court records and oral arguments show the state expected Stormont Vail to look into having a home health agency care for the patient in Emporia instead of continued hospitalization — even though home health generally does not take care of pregnant patients and her doctors believed the expectant mother was not stable enough to discharge.
“The way it’s supposed to work,” said Darren Sharp, an attorney representing KDHE, “is the managed care organization, in this case Sunflower Health, on behalf of KDHE reviews the medical records, asks about the appropriate level of care and whether there’s any other interventions that would be more cost effective or appropriate depending on the level of or depending on the patient’s records and the patient’s status.”
Sharp argued medical records showed the patients was getting better because of total parenteral nutrition, or TPN.
“This is when a tube, a PICC, is inserted and your minerals and your electrolytes and all of your nutrition is then intravenously provided,” Sharp said.
He said the treatment “was eliminating her vomiting, her diarrhea, she had no fever, her glucose levels were stabilized.”
In their ruling, the judges indicated the KDHE appeals committee primarily cared about the cost saving of using home health versus hospitalization while disregarding the treating physician for insufficient reasons and ignoring evidence on potential benefits or harms to the patient.
But the judges declined to resolve the dispute. Rather, unless the decision is appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court, the matter goes back to the KDHE administrative process.
There, the agency’s appeals committee must reconsider the case consistent with the Court of Appeal’s ruling. The published decision sets new precedent interpreting state laws and regulations on the Medicaid program.
“While this court provides no opinion on whether the disputed inpatient healthcare services met the definition of medical necessity,” Hurst wrote, “the record shows that some of the (appeals committee’s) factual findings were not supported by the record as a whole and that the (appeals committee) inaccurately applied the law when it failed to consider (the patient’s) individual characteristics and assess the harms and benefits of the healthcare intervention.
“In making a medical necessity determination, the reviewing agency must make an individualized determination based on the record as a whole.”
Jason Alatidd is a Statehouse reporter for The Topeka Capital-Journal. He can be reached by email at jalatidd@usatodayco.com. Follow him on X @Jason_Alatidd.
TOPEKA, Kan. (WIBW) – It may not seem like a lot of relief, but gas and diesel prices have declined over the past week.
Friday morning’s national average for a gallon of unleaded gas was $4.39, according to the Automobile Association of America.
That’s down three cents from $4.42 on Thursday; down 16 cents from a week ago; but was up 17 cents from $4.22 a month ago and up $.23 from $3.16 a year ago.
In Kansas, AAA says, unleaded gas on Friday was averaging $3.96 a gallon — down four cents from $4.00 on Thursday; down 13 cents from $3.96 a week ago; but up 26 cents from $3.70 a month ago; and up $1.07 over $2.89 a year ago.
Diesel fuel also was dropping in price. AAA says Friday’s national average for a gallon of diesel was $5.52 a gallon — down three cents from $5.55 on Thursday; down 12 cents from $5.64 a week a go; but up six cents from $5.46 a month ago and up $1.98 from $3.54 a year ago.
Kansas diesel fuel prices, according to AAA, checked in at an average of $4.98 on Friday. That’s five cents below $5.03 on Thursday; down 16 cents from $5.14 a week ago; but up 24 cents over $4.74 a month ago; and up $1.72 from $3.26 a year ago.
In Topeka, GasBuddy.com on Friday morning showed unleaded gas prices ranging between $3.77 and $4.09 in Topeka, with diesel fuel going for between $4.94 and $5.29 a gallon.
Copyright 2026 WIBW. All rights reserved.
Kansas
Sunflower soak: Rain welcomes Arkansas baseball to Kansas, might stay awhile | Whole Hog Sports
Kansas
NFL Trade Rumors: Kansas City Chiefs linked to $15M New York Giants pass rusher and $10M Chicago Bears tight end in bold ESPN proposals
The Kansas City Chiefs continue to be linked to potential trade targets despite entering the 2026 season with one of the NFL’s deepest rosters. Recent speculation from ESPN connected Kansas City to New York Giants edge rusher Kayvon Thibodeaux and Chicago Bears tight end Cole Kmet. In the proposed scenarios, the Chiefs would send a 2027 fourth-round pick for Thibodeaux or a 2027 third-round pick while receiving Kmet and a fifth-round selection. While neither proposal gained traction with the opposing teams, the rumors have sparked debate about whether Kansas City should make a significant move before the season.
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Player | Kayvon Thibodeaux / Cole Kmet |
| Current Team | New York Giants / Chicago Bears |
| Rumored Team | Kansas City Chiefs |
| Contract Status | Both under contract |
| Salary Cap Hit | Thibodeaux: manageable rookie extension window; Kmet carries a significant future cap number |
| Trade Likelihood | Low to moderate |
| Latest Insider Update | ESPN floated hypothetical trade proposals |
| Potential Return | 2027 fourth-round pick for Thibodeaux; 2027 third-round pick for Kmet |
Which teams are interested in Kayvon Thibodeaux and Cole Kmet?
Kansas City emerged as the most notable team connected to both players through the ESPN exercise. The fit is understandable. For Thibodeaux, the Chiefs could add another proven pass-rushing threat alongside their current edge group. Defensive line depth remains one of the most valuable assets in today’s NFL, especially for teams with championship aspirations. Adding a player of Thibodeaux’s caliber would strengthen the rotation and provide insurance against injuries. Kmet addresses a different need. While Travis Kelce remains a central piece of the offense, he is approaching the later stages of his career. Kmet offers a combination of blocking ability and receiving production that could help Kansas City maintain stability at tight end while preparing for the future.
What insiders are saying about the trade rumors
According to AtoZ Sports’ Charles Goldman, the concept behind pursuing Thibodeaux makes sense, but the compensation falls short. New York has little incentive to move a talented edge rusher for a mid-round draft pick when pass rushers are among the league’s most sought-after players. Goldman was similarly cautious regarding Kmet. Although he acknowledged the tight end would fill a practical role in Kansas City’s offense, he questioned whether investing draft capital and future money in Kmet is the best long-term strategy. Instead, he suggested the Chiefs may be better served developing a successor to Kelce through the draft.
Contract details and salary cap implications
Any trade discussion involving Kansas City begins with the salary cap. The Chiefs would likely need to create additional financial flexibility before taking on a notable contract. Thibodeaux presents the cleaner situation. He remains young, productive, and could be controlled through future contract negotiations. There are no reported no-trade restrictions complicating a potential move. Kmet’s situation is more challenging. His future cap numbers could require restructuring or a new agreement if Kansas City wanted to keep him long term. That added financial commitment makes the decision more complicated than the draft-pick cost alone.
How the trade could impact both teams
For Kansas City, acquiring Thibodeaux would strengthen a defense already built to compete for another Super Bowl. A deeper pass rush often becomes critical during playoff runs, where one extra pressure can change a game. Kmet’s arrival would have a different effect. He could ease the workload on Kelce while giving the offense a more balanced tight end room. At the same time, surrendering valuable draft assets could limit future roster-building options. From the Giants’ and Bears’ perspectives, keeping proven starters may provide more value than collecting future picks. That reality is why both proposed deals remain long shots, even if the Chiefs continue to surface in trade conversations.
-
San Francisco, CA7 minutes agoDriver Arrested After Pedestrian Killed, Three Injured In Mission District Crash
-
Dallas, TX13 minutes agoMcAllen Welcomes Texas Hockey | Dallas Stars
-
Miami, FL19 minutes agoPair arrested in connection with armed home invasion robbery in Miami, cops say
-
Boston, MA24 minutes agoSaturday storm will bring bursts of rain, strong winds, and… snow?
-
Denver, CO31 minutes agoVon Miller lobbying Broncos to bring him back (here’s the latest update)
-
Seattle, WA37 minutes agoSeattle travel alert: Massive road closures, light rail shutdowns this weekend
-
San Diego, CA43 minutes agoLetters: A selective immigration policy ultimately fails us all
-
Milwaukee, WI49 minutes agoMilwaukee County opts for drones over fireworks again this summer
