Blatt v. Perales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blatt v. Perales

201 A.D.2d 258, 608 N.Y.S.2d 826

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 201 A.D.2d 258 (Blatt v. Perales) 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

Blatt v. Perales, 201 A.D.2d 258, 608 N.Y.S.2d 826 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Commissioner dated September 11, 1990, which denied the petitioner’s claim for reimbursement of extraordinary services of 24-hour private duty nursing, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Edward Greenfield, J.], entered September 24, 1992) dismissed, without costs and disbursements.

There was substantial evidence that the hospital nursing staff was capable of attending to petitioner’s medical problems obviating the need for 24-hour private duty nursing care (10 NYCRR 85.33 [c]; 18 NYCRR 505.8 [c]). Petitioner’s other claims are not properly before this Court since the IAS Court stayed determination of those issues pending decision on the substantial evidence question. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Wallach and Ross, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Commissioner dated September 11, 1990, which denied the petitioner’s claim for reimbursement of extraordinary services of 24-hour private duty nursing, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Edward Greenfield, J.], entered September 24, 1992) dismissed, without costs and disbursements.

There was substantial evidence that the hospital nursing staff was capable of attending to petitioner’s medical problems obviating the need for 24-hour private duty nursing care (10 NYCRR 85.33 [c]; 18 NYCRR 505.8 [c]). Petitioner’s other claims are not properly before this Court since the IAS Court stayed determination of those issues pending decision on the substantial evidence question. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Wallach and Ross, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 A.D.2d 258, 608 N.Y.S.2d 826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blatt-v-perales-nyappdiv-1994.