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.

In re Meyer

Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

December 18, 2013

In the Matter of Jill Meyer, etc., appellant,
v.
Forest Hills Hospital, etc., et al., respondents. Index No. 5072/11

Wolin & Wolin, Jericho, N.Y. (Alan E. Wolin of counsel), for appellant.

Epstein Becker & Green, New York, N.Y. (Traycee Ellen Klein of counsel), for respondents.

PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the Board of Trustees of Forest Hills Hospital denying the petitioner's application for clinical privileges, the petitioner appeals from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), dated November 14, 2011, as granted that branch of the motion of Forest Hills Hospital and the Board of Trustees of Forest Hills Hospital which was to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and, in effect, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The petitioner's application for clinical privileges at the respondent Forest Hills Hospital was denied by the respondent Board of Trustees of Forest Hills Hospital. A physician who, like the petitioner, seeks to challenge the denial of clinical privileges must first file a complaint with the Public Health Council (hereinafter PHC) (see Public Health Law § 2801-b; Gelbard v Genesee Hosp., 87 N.Y.2d 691, 695-697; Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp., 46 N.Y.2d 736, 738). It is undisputed that the petitioner failed to file a complaint with the PHC before commencing the instant CPLR article 78 proceeding. Contrary to the petitioner's contention, no exceptions apply that would allow her to avoid this procedural step. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the respondents' motion which was to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and properly, in effect, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding (see Indemini v Beth Israel Med. Ctr., 4 N.Y.3d 63, 66; Eden v St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hosp. Ctr., 39 A.D.3d 215, 216; Matter of Ireh v Nassau Univ. Med. Ctr., 33 A.D.3d 702, 703; Matter of Capote v Our Lady of Mercy Med. Ctr., 168 A.D.2d 238; Matter of Libby [ Long Is. Jewish-Hillside Med. Ctr. ], 163 A.D.2d 388).

SKELOS, J.P., BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and SGROI, JJ., concur.


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.