McLaughlin v. Wing

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McLaughlin v. Wing

255 A.D.2d 954, 680 N.Y.S.2d 185, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12206

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 13, 1998·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner, who is over the age of 18, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination made following a fair hearing denying her request for Medicaid reimbursement for root canal therapy [955] on a rear molar. As a Medicaid recipient, petitioner is entitled to essential, not optimal, care. Recognizing that a reasonable alternative course of treatment would be extraction and replacement of the tooth, the Administrative Law Judge found that root canal therapy is not medically necessary. That determination addresses concerns expressed by petitioner’s dentist and is supported by substantial evidence. We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Major, J.) Present— Green, J. P., Wisner, Pigott, Jr., Balio and Fallon, JJ.

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

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner, who is over the age of 18, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination made following a fair hearing denying her request for Medicaid reimbursement for root canal therapy [955] on a rear molar. As a Medicaid recipient, petitioner is entitled to essential, not optimal, care. Recognizing that a reasonable alternative course of treatment would be extraction and replacement of the tooth, the Administrative Law Judge found that root canal therapy is not medically necessary. That determination addresses concerns expressed by petitioner’s dentist and is supported by substantial evidence. We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Major, J.) Present— Green, J. P., Wisner, Pigott, Jr., Balio and Fallon, JJ.

McLaughlin v. Wing, 255 A.D.2d 954, 680 N.Y.S.2d 185, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12206 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

255 A.D.2d 954 (McLaughlin v. Wing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related