Rizzuto v. Daines

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rizzuto v. Daines

55 A.D.3d 740, 864 N.Y.S.2d 788

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

DecidedOctober 14, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 55 A.D.3d 740 (Rizzuto v. Daines) 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

Rizzuto v. Daines, 55 A.D.3d 740, 864 N.Y.S.2d 788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding, [741]*741inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, by his designee, dated May 31, 2006, which, after a hearing, found that the failure of the New York State Office of Mental Health to determine the petitioner’s eligibility for the Medicare Savings Program was correct, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.) entered April 3, 2007, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding for failure to state a cause of action.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding (see CPLR 7803 [1], [3]). Rivera, J.R, Dillon, Covello and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding, [741]*741inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, by his designee, dated May 31, 2006, which, after a hearing, found that the failure of the New York State Office of Mental Health to determine the petitioner’s eligibility for the Medicare Savings Program was correct, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.) entered April 3, 2007, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding for failure to state a cause of action.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding (see CPLR 7803 [1], [3]). Rivera, J.R, Dillon, Covello and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.3d 740, 864 N.Y.S.2d 788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rizzuto-v-daines-nyappdiv-2008.