Easton v. State Board for Professional Medical Conduct

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Easton v. State Board for Professional Medical Conduct

214 A.D.2d 403, 625 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4228

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

DecidedApril 13, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 214 A.D.2d 403 (Easton v. State Board for Professional Medical Conduct) 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

Easton v. State Board for Professional Medical Conduct, 214 A.D.2d 403, 625 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4228 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Parness, J.), entered on or about October 24, 1994, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to enjoin respondent from conducting a referral hearing pursuant to Public Health Law § 230, granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the petition for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Applying the principle of collateral estoppel, the civil action in which petitioner was found liable for Medicaid fraud (People v Brooklyn Psychosocial Rehabilitation Inst., 185 AD2d 230, lv denied 81 NY2d 702, rearg denied 81 NY2d 953, cert denied sub nom. Easton v New York, — US —, 114 S Ct 178), supports a referral proceeding against him pursuant to Public Health Law § 230 (10) (p), since the parties and issues in such proceeding would be identical to those that were before the court in the civil action, and there was a full and fair opportunity to litigate the disputed issues (see, Kaufman v Eli Lilly & Co., 65 NY2d 449). Accordingly, prohibition does not lie (see, Matter of Doe v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 484). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Parness, J.), entered on or about October 24, 1994, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to enjoin respondent from conducting a referral hearing pursuant to Public Health Law § 230, granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the petition for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Applying the principle of collateral estoppel, the civil action in which petitioner was found liable for Medicaid fraud (People v Brooklyn Psychosocial Rehabilitation Inst., 185 AD2d 230, lv denied 81 NY2d 702, rearg denied 81 NY2d 953, cert denied sub nom. Easton v New York, — US —, 114 S Ct 178), supports a referral proceeding against him pursuant to Public Health Law § 230 (10) (p), since the parties and issues in such proceeding would be identical to those that were before the court in the civil action, and there was a full and fair opportunity to litigate the disputed issues (see, Kaufman v Eli Lilly & Co., 65 NY2d 449). Accordingly, prohibition does not lie (see, Matter of Doe v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 484). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.D.2d 403, 625 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/easton-v-state-board-for-professional-medical-conduct-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack