Johnson v. Wing

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. Wing

237 A.D.2d 960, 654 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3558

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

DecidedMarch 14, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 237 A.D.2d 960 (Johnson v. Wing) 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

Johnson v. Wing, 237 A.D.2d 960, 654 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3558 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination unanimously annulled on the law without costs and petition granted in accordance with the following Memorandum: Petitioner is a 49-year-old man who is completely wheelchair dependent. Petitioner established that the elevation of his legs and his frequent repositioning in his wheelchair are medically necessary to promote his circulation and prevent further incidents of decubitus. The tilt in space and elevating leg rests features of the wheelchair requested by petitioner allow petitioner to achieve the proper elevation of his legs and promote optimal circulation. Although petitioner has personal care aides assigned to assist him with the tasks of daily living who can perform those functions, the evidence is uncontroverted that petitioner is frequently left for prolonged periods of time without the services of a care aide. Thus, respondent’s determination that the wheelchair with the tilt in space and elevating leg rest features is not medically necessary is not supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Gartz v Wing, 236 AD2d 890; Matter of Dobson v Perales, 175 AD2d 628). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mahoney, J.) Present—Green, J. P., Law-ton, Doerr, Balio and Fallon, JJ.

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

Determination unanimously annulled on the law without costs and petition granted in accordance with the following Memorandum: Petitioner is a 49-year-old man who is completely wheelchair dependent. Petitioner established that the elevation of his legs and his frequent repositioning in his wheelchair are medically necessary to promote his circulation and prevent further incidents of decubitus. The tilt in space and elevating leg rests features of the wheelchair requested by petitioner allow petitioner to achieve the proper elevation of his legs and promote optimal circulation. Although petitioner has personal care aides assigned to assist him with the tasks of daily living who can perform those functions, the evidence is uncontroverted that petitioner is frequently left for prolonged periods of time without the services of a care aide. Thus, respondent’s determination that the wheelchair with the tilt in space and elevating leg rest features is not medically necessary is not supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Gartz v Wing, 236 AD2d 890; Matter of Dobson v Perales, 175 AD2d 628). (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mahoney, J.) Present—Green, J. P., Law-ton, Doerr, Balio and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D.2d 960, 654 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-wing-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack