Gross v. Perales
| Decision Date | 20 August 1987 |
| Parties | In re George GROSS, etc., et al., Petitioners-Respondents, v. Cesar PERALES, etc., et al., Respondents-Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before SANDLER, J.P., and CARRO, KASSAL, ELLERIN, and WALLACH, JJ.
Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur Blyn, J.), entered August 29, 1986, which in this CPLR Article 78 proceeding granted the petition of George Gross, as Commissioner of the New York City Human Resources Administration, and the City of New York to the extent, inter alia, that it found that respondents had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in applying a particular standard in its audit of the timeliness of the City's public assistance case closings and reductions and imposing upon the City a 20 million dollar administrative penalty and which determined that the administrative penalty was null and void and directed respondents to restore the 20 million dollars to the City, with interest from March 28, 1983, is modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the award of interest, and the judgment is otherwise affirmed, without costs.
We affirm the judgment for the reasons stated below, except to vacate that portion of the judgment directing that as to the 20 million dollars to be returned to the City respondents must pay 9 per cent interest as of March 29, 1983, the date the penalty was assessed. The right to interest is purely statutory. Under CPLR 7806, which specifies what relief may be granted in a judgment in a special proceeding, only restitution or damages which are incidental to the primary relief sought by the petitioner may be awarded.
The primary relief requested in this proceeding was a determination that respondent New York State Department of Social Services had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in applying a particular standard to its audit concerning the timeliness of petitioner's public assistance case closings and reductions. Incidental to that relief was a recovery of the penalty imposed on petitioner as a result of respondent's findings. Thus, a judgment awarding a return of that penalty was appropriate under CPLR 7806 as restitution incidental to the primary relief.
However, CPLR 7806 nowhere authorizes an award of interest under the circumstances presented.
All concur. [See, 130 Misc.2d 132, 495 N.Y.S.2d 125.]
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gross v. Perales
...found that the NYSDSS acted arbitrarily and capriciously, and granted the petition in its entirety. The Appellate Division, 133 A.D.2d 37, 518 N.Y.S.2d 624, modified by vacating so much of the judgment as awarded interest on the $20 million in reimbursements. We granted leave to appeal and ......
-
Metro. Taxicab Bd. of Trade v. N.Y.C. Taxi & Limousine Comm'n
...Division modified so much of the judgment as awarded interest on the $20 million in reimbursements. ( Matter of Gross v. Perales, 133 A.D.2d 37, 518 N.Y.S.2d 624 [1st Dept.1987].) On appeal, the Court of Appeals rejected the State's contention that the City's claim was essentially one for m......
-
City of New York v. Wing
...and (e). To this end, we find that petitioner is not being ordered to pay interest on a judgment (see, e.g., Matter of Gross v. Perales, 133 A.D.2d 37, 518 N.Y.S.2d 624, affd. 72 N.Y.2d 231, 532 N.Y.S.2d 68, 527 N.E.2d 1205); rather, the interest figure is a component of the $74 million Fed......
-
Meloni v. Goord
...Patrick v. Perales, 172 A.D.2d 279, 568 N.Y.S.2d 379, lv. denied 78 N.Y.2d 862, 576 N.Y.S.2d 220, 582 N.E.2d 603; Matter of Gross v. Perales, 133 A.D.2d 37, 518 N.Y.S.2d 624, affd. 72 N.Y.2d 231, 532 N.Y.S.2d 68, 527 N.E.2d 1205, rearg. denied 72 N.Y.2d 1042, 534 N.Y.S.2d 940, 531 N.E.2d 66......