Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Northern Manor Multicare Center, Inc. v. Daines

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


November 17, 2009

IN THE MATTER OF NORTHERN MANOR MULTICARE CENTER, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
RICHARD F. DAINES, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

In a purported proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review five determinations of the respondent New York State Department of Health, all seeking reimbursement from the petitioner of alleged overpayment of Medicaid funds, which was, in actuality, an action to enforce a stipulation of settlement and to recover damages for the breach thereof, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Berliner, J.), dated December 16, 2008, which granted the respondents' motion, in effect, to dismiss the purported proceeding for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(2).

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, HOWARD MILLER L. PRISCILLA HALL, JJ.

(Index No. 4839/07)

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the Supreme Court did not err in dismissing the purported proceeding. It is not, as the petitioner contends, a proceeding whose main thrust is to overturn a rate determination by the respondents. Rather, the essential nature of the petitioner's claim is to enforce a stipulation of settlement it made with the respondents and to recover damages for the breach thereof. Accordingly, it is in the nature of a breach of contract claim and should have been brought in the Court of Claims (see Abiele Contr. v New York City School Constr. Auth., 91 NY2d 1, 7; Matter of Gross v Perales, 72 NY2d 231, 235; cf. Hoffman v State of New York, 42 AD3d 641).

In light of our determination, the petitioner's remaining contentions either are academic or need not be reached.

RIVERA, J.P., FLORIO, MILLER and HALL, JJ., concur.

20091117

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.