Pleasant v. Wing

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pleasant v. Wing

249 A.D.2d 986, 671 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5149

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

DecidedApril 29, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 986 (Pleasant 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

Pleasant v. Wing, 249 A.D.2d 986, 671 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5149 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination unanimously modified on the law and as modified confirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: The notice informing petitioner that his public assistance and medical assistance benefits would be discontinued was insufficient because it failed to inform him adequately of the reasons for the discontinuance and the issues that were to be the subject of the fair hearing (see, Matter of Colon v Blum, 81 AD2d 637, 638). Thus, we annul that portion of the determination that sustained the suspension of petitioner’s public assistance and medical assistance benefits.

The determination to discontinue petitioner’s food stamps benefits is supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 179). Thus, we confirm that portion of the determination. (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Jefferson County, Gilbert, J.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Pigott, Jr., Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

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

—Determination unanimously modified on the law and as modified confirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: The notice informing petitioner that his public assistance and medical assistance benefits would be discontinued was insufficient because it failed to inform him adequately of the reasons for the discontinuance and the issues that were to be the subject of the fair hearing (see, Matter of Colon v Blum, 81 AD2d 637, 638). Thus, we annul that portion of the determination that sustained the suspension of petitioner’s public assistance and medical assistance benefits.

The determination to discontinue petitioner’s food stamps benefits is supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 179). Thus, we confirm that portion of the determination. (CPLR art 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Jefferson County, Gilbert, J.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Pigott, Jr., Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 986, 671 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pleasant-v-wing-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack