Armenia v. Blue Cross of Western New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Armenia v. Blue Cross of Western New York, Inc.

190 A.D.2d 1025, 593 N.Y.S.2d 648, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1226

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 5, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 190 A.D.2d 1025 (Armenia v. Blue Cross of Western New York, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Armenia v. Blue Cross of Western New York, Inc., 190 A.D.2d 1025, 593 N.Y.S.2d 648, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1226 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In this breach of contract action between a participating provider physician and a health maintenance organization concerning reimbursement for provider services, Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff’s motion to compel disclosure. Because the material sought relates to the performance of defendant’s quality assurance review functions, it was exempt from disclosure (see, Education Law § 6527 [3]; McGlynn v Grinberg, 172 AD2d 960; Shapiro v Central Gen. Hosp., 171 AD2d 786; Matter of Albany Med. Ctr. Hosp. v Denis, 161 AD2d 1030; Parker v St. Clare’s Hosp., 159 AD2d 919; see also, Lilly v Turecki, 112 AD2d 788; cf., Matter of St. Elizabeth’s Hosp. v State Bd. of Professional Med. Conduct, 174 AD2d 225). We reject plaintiff’s contention that to apply the statutory prohibition against such disclosure would run contrary to the legislative intent. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J. — Discovery.) Present — Boomer, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In this breach of contract action between a participating provider physician and a health maintenance organization concerning reimbursement for provider services, Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff’s motion to compel disclosure. Because the material sought relates to the performance of defendant’s quality assurance review functions, it was exempt from disclosure (see, Education Law § 6527 [3]; McGlynn v Grinberg, 172 AD2d 960; Shapiro v Central Gen. Hosp., 171 AD2d 786; Matter of Albany Med. Ctr. Hosp. v Denis, 161 AD2d 1030; Parker v St. Clare’s Hosp., 159 AD2d 919; see also, Lilly v Turecki, 112 AD2d 788; cf., Matter of St. Elizabeth’s Hosp. v State Bd. of Professional Med. Conduct, 174 AD2d 225). We reject plaintiff’s contention that to apply the statutory prohibition against such disclosure would run contrary to the legislative intent. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J. — Discovery.) Present — Boomer, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 A.D.2d 1025, 593 N.Y.S.2d 648, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armenia-v-blue-cross-of-western-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack