Eichna v. Demarzo

52 A.D.3d 513, 857 N.Y.S.2d 913
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 3, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 52 A.D.3d 513 (Eichna v. Demarzo) 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
Eichna v. Demarzo, 52 A.D.3d 513, 857 N.Y.S.2d 913 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Department of Health, dated May 11, 2006, which, after a fair hearing, affirmed a determination of the Department of Social Services of the County of Suffolk denying the application of the petitioner’s decedent for medical assistance benefits.

Adjudged that the petition is granted, on the law, with one bill of costs, the determination is annulled, and the matter is remitted to the respondent Department of Social Services of the County of Suffolk for further proceedings consistent herewith.

The petitioner failed to provide the Department of Social Services of the County of Suffolk (hereinafter DSSCS) with the necessary documentation to verify the decedent’s eligibility for medical assistance benefits for the two-month period of his hospitalization prior to his death due to difficulties in obtaining letters of administration. However, at or before the time of the fair hearing before the New York State Department of Health (hereinafter NYSDOH), the petitioner submitted the necessary documentation. Under the particular circumstances of this case, there was an insufficient basis for NYSDOH’s determination affirming DSSCS’s denial of benefits (see Matter of Taylor v Bane, 199 AD2d 1071 [1993]; Matter of Segall v D’Elia, 92 AD2d 897 [1983]). Rather, NYSDOH should have remitted the matter to DSSCS for a new determination based on the documentation submitted. Spolzino, J.P, Lifson, Florio and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Medford Multicare Ctr. v. Zucker
2018 NY Slip Op 3837 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Bosco v. McGuire
111 A.D.3d 931 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Estate of Daniell v. Demarzo
74 A.D.3d 1063 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 A.D.3d 513, 857 N.Y.S.2d 913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eichna-v-demarzo-nyappdiv-2008.