Louis v. Dowling

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Louis v. Dowling

216 A.D.2d 396, 628 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6191

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

DecidedJune 12, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 396 (Louis v. Dowling) 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

Louis v. Dowling, 216 A.D.2d 396, 628 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6191 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated November 16, 1993, which, after a hearing, discontinued the petitioner’s public assistance, food stamps, and Medicaid benefits.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The determination to discontinue benefits was properly based on the failure of the petitioner’s husband to provide necessary information about his financial circumstances (see, 18 NYCRR 351.6 [c] [2]).

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated November 16, 1993, which, after a hearing, discontinued the petitioner’s public assistance, food stamps, and Medicaid benefits.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The determination to discontinue benefits was properly based on the failure of the petitioner’s husband to provide necessary information about his financial circumstances (see, 18 NYCRR 351.6 [c] [2]).

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 396, 628 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louis-v-dowling-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack