Berger v. Blum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Berger v. Blum

81 A.D.2d 903, 439 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11619

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

DecidedMay 26, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 81 A.D.2d 903 (Berger v. Blum) 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

Berger v. Blum, 81 A.D.2d 903, 439 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11619 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services, dated August 13, 1979 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency reducing home health aide for Meta Adler. Petition granted to the extent that the determination is annulled, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to restore petitioner’s home health aide assistance; the proceeding is otherwise dismissed on the merits. When the question is, as here, whether assistance should be reduced or discontinued, the burden is on the local agency (see Matter of Woodley v Lavine, 54 AD2d 912). The local agency introduced only an uncorroborated hearsay statement and presented no witnesses at the hearing. The local agency did not meet its burden and did not submit “the substantial evidence upon which an administrative decision must be based” (see Matter of Fore v Toia, 60 AD2d 913; Newman v Shang, 67 AD2d 999). Damiani, J.P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Thompson, JJ., concur.

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

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services, dated August 13, 1979 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency reducing home health aide for Meta Adler. Petition granted to the extent that the determination is annulled, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to restore petitioner’s home health aide assistance; the proceeding is otherwise dismissed on the merits. When the question is, as here, whether assistance should be reduced or discontinued, the burden is on the local agency (see Matter of Woodley v Lavine, 54 AD2d 912). The local agency introduced only an uncorroborated hearsay statement and presented no witnesses at the hearing. The local agency did not meet its burden and did not submit “the substantial evidence upon which an administrative decision must be based” (see Matter of Fore v Toia, 60 AD2d 913; Newman v Shang, 67 AD2d 999). Damiani, J.P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 903, 439 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berger-v-blum-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack