Walters v. Kaladjian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Walters v. Kaladjian

222 A.D.2d 684, 636 N.Y.S.2d 650, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13928

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 222 A.D.2d 684 (Walters v. Kaladjian) 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

Walters v. Kaladjian, 222 A.D.2d 684, 636 N.Y.S.2d 650, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13928 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the respondent Acting Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated November 6, 1992, made after a hearing, as found that the petitioner lacks standing to seek administrative review of the adequacy of foster care payments that were made on behalf of children who no longer reside with her, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lama, J.), dated August 8, 1994, which, inter alia, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

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

The petitioner, as a provider of foster care rather than a recipient thereof, does not have standing to seek administrative review of the adequacy of foster care payments that were made on behalf of children who no longer reside with her (see, Matter of Holton v Sabol, 221 AD2d 341; Matter of Tobias v Bane, 218 AD2d 743; Matter of Burgess v Sabol, 218 AD2d 736). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding.

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see, Social Services Law § 398-a [2]; Matter of Babicz v Kaplan, 180 AD2d 86, 90; Matter of Costello v Perales, 167 AD2d 602, 603; New York State Council of Voluntary Child, Care Agencies, v Blum, 105 Misc 2d 154, 156). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the respondent Acting Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated November 6, 1992, made after a hearing, as found that the petitioner lacks standing to seek administrative review of the adequacy of foster care payments that were made on behalf of children who no longer reside with her, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lama, J.), dated August 8, 1994, which, inter alia, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

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

The petitioner, as a provider of foster care rather than a recipient thereof, does not have standing to seek administrative review of the adequacy of foster care payments that were made on behalf of children who no longer reside with her (see, Matter of Holton v Sabol, 221 AD2d 341; Matter of Tobias v Bane, 218 AD2d 743; Matter of Burgess v Sabol, 218 AD2d 736). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding.

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see, Social Services Law § 398-a [2]; Matter of Babicz v Kaplan, 180 AD2d 86, 90; Matter of Costello v Perales, 167 AD2d 602, 603; New York State Council of Voluntary Child, Care Agencies, v Blum, 105 Misc 2d 154, 156). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 684, 636 N.Y.S.2d 650, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walters-v-kaladjian-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack