MATTER OF GILMAN v. Golfinopoulous

• Decision Date: 21 June 2001
• Parties: In the Matter of DAVID GILMAN, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>GEORGE GOLFINOPOULOUS, as Administrator of the City of New York 18-B Program, et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

284 A.D.2d 224

726 N.Y.S.2d 271

In the Matter of DAVID GILMAN, Appellant,

v.GEORGE GOLFINOPOULOUS, as Administrator of the City of New York 18-B Program, et al., Respondents.

Decided June 21, 2001.

Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Mazzarelli, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

The motion court correctly ruled that it had no authority to review Judge Rand's order reducing petitioner's fee. Trial court orders granting or denying increases in the statutorily recommended fees under County Law § 722-b are "essentially administrative in nature and, accordingly, are not amenable to judicial review on the merits by an appellate panel" (Matter of Director of Assigned Counsel Plan of City of N. Y. [Bodek], 87 NY2d 191, 194).