City of N.Y. v. Contract Dispute Resolution Bd. of N.Y.
Decision Date | 31 October 2013 |
Citation | 110 A.D.3d 647,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 07131,974 N.Y.S.2d 65 |
Parties | In re CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Petitioners–Respondents, v. CONTRACT DISPUTE RESOLUTION BOARD OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent–Respondent, New York Health Care, Inc., Respondent–Appellant. In re New York Health Care, Inc., Petitioner–Appellant, v. New York City Human Resources Administration Home Care Services Program, et al., Respondents–Respondents. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Wachtel Masyr & Missry LLP, New York (Sara Spiegelman of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for City of New York and New York City Human Resources Administration/Department of Social Services, respondents.
Peggy Kuo, New York, for Contract Dispute Resolution Board of the City of New York, respondent.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Paul G. Feinman, J.), entered March 6, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted in part an article 78 petition filed by the City of New York and New York City Human Resources Administration/ Department of Social Services (collectively, HRA), to the extent of remanding the matter to the Contract Dispute Resolution Board (CDRB) for a complete determination regarding HRA's authority to recoup unspent funds received by appellant pursuant to the Health Care Reform Act (HCRA), and denied a separate article 78 petition filed by appellant seeking, inter alia, to compel CDRB and the Office of the Comptroller of the City of New York (Comptroller) to review HRA's authority to recoup non-HCRA funds unspent by appellant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly remanded the matter to CDRB to make a complete and final determination regarding HRA's authority to recoup unspent HCRA funds, on the ground that CDRB's failure to address whether there is any statutory basis for such authority rendered its determination arbitrary and capricious. The remand to review this statutory issue was appropriate notwithstanding that the court found no error in the aspect of CDRB's determination concluding that HRA has no contractual basis to recoup HCRA funds ( see Society of N.Y. Hosp. v. Axelrod, 163 A.D.2d 142, 557 N.Y.S.2d 363 [1st Dept.1990] ).
The court properly declined to compel the Comptroller to review appellant's claims regarding non-HCRA funds, since the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Porter v. New York City Hous. Auth.
...consent or approval, the record precludes an adequate review by this Court (see Matter of City of New York v. Contract Dispute Resolution Bd. Of the City of N.Y., 110 A.D.3d 647, 974 N.Y.S.2d 65 [1st Dept. 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 862, 2014 WL 702121 [2014] ; A.F.C. Enters., Inc., 79 A.D.......
-
Barele, Inc. v. Contract Dispute Resolution Bd. of N.Y., Index No. 110556/11
...rationally based and not arbitrary nor affected by an error of law. C.P.L.R. § 7803(3); City of New York v. ContractDispute Resolution Bd. of the Citv of N.Y., 110 A.D.3d 647, 647 (1st Dep't 2013); L&L Painting Co.. Inc. v. Citv of New York, 69 A.D.3d 517, 517-18 (1st Dep't 2010); Weeks Mar......
-
People v. Jefferies
...given a limiting instruction during the cross-examination and that the charge given just prior to deliberations was improper, and we [110 A.D.3d 647]decline to review these claims in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that the court's charge, viewed as a whole, suff......
-
N. Star Mech. Corp. v. N.Y. Cnty. Dist. Attorneys Office
...2022 NY Slip Op 31948(U) NORTH STAR MECHANICAL CORP., ... ATTORNEYS OFFICE, MAYOR'S OFFICE OF CONTRACT SERVICES Respondent. No. 161509/2021, MOTION SEQ ... the City of New York's PASSPort system (motion sequence ... Yorkv Contract Dispute Resolution Bd. of the City of NY, ... 110 A.D.3d ... ...