People v. Dobbs Ferry Medical Pavillion,Inc.
| Decision Date | 03 July 1973 |
| Citation | 347 N.Y.S.2d 452,301 N.E.2d 435,33 N.Y.2d 584 |
| Parties | , 301 N.E.2d 435 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. DOBBS FERRY MEDICAL PAVILLION, INC., Defendant, and Jerry Zucker, Respondent. Donald M. Pearlman et al., Nonparty Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. (Joel H. Sachs, Samuel A. Hirshowitz and Philip Weinberg, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Ephraim London and Franklin S. Bonem, New York City, for respondents.
The order of the Appellate Division, 40 A.D.2d 324, 340 N.Y.S.2d 108 should be affirmed, with costs. The applicable statute and regulations governing the requirement of a license for an enterprise engaged in institutional medical care and treatment are entirely too broad. The terms 'facility' and 'clinic', most often used, are inclusive of many kinds of individual, partnership, and group medical practice, which concededly are not subject to or intended to be subject to licensing. Moreover, the terms are ambivalent in whether they refer to physical as distinguished from functional or personnel resources used or available in the treatment of medical conditions, and that ambivalence is particularly frustrative in this case. In so holding, it is not intended to inhibit the drafting and application of statute or regulations which accurately describe the kinds of enterprise to be licensed, including perhaps the specialized, large-scale handling of abortions by institutional enterprises or those held out as providing the varied services of an institutional enterprise, subject, of course, to the strictures laid down in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 and Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 93 S.Ct. 739, 35 L.Ed.2d 201.
Order affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Westchester Women's Health Organization v. Whalen
...Public Health Law." 10 N.Y.C.R.R. § 600.8. Regulation 600.8 was promulgated in response to People v. Dobbs Ferry Medical Pavillion, Inc., 33 N.Y.2d 584, 347 N.Y.S.2d 452, 301 N.E.2d 435 (1973) (mem.), wherein the New York Court of Appeals held that the New York statute and regulations then ......
-
Framingham Clinic, Inc. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Framingham
...which concededly are not subject to or intended to be subject to (the statute in question)." People v. Dobbs Ferry Medical Pavillion, Inc., 33 N.Y.2d 584, 585, 347 N.Y.S.2d 452, 301 N.E.2d 435, affirming 40 App.Div.2d 324, 340 N.Y.S.2d 108 At a minimum, we think it clear from the breadth of......
-
Auerbach v. Bennett
...adversely affected by a judgment (People v. Dobbs Ferry Med. Pavillion, 40 A.D.2d 324, 325, 340 N.Y.S.2d 108, 110, affd. 33 N.Y.2d 584, 347 N.Y.S.2d 452, 301 N.E.2d 435). The true question is whether the nonparty may be bound by the judgment if he does not take affirmative action in the lit......
-
Male Infant B., Matter of
...5511 (see Hobart v. Hobart, 86 N.Y. 636; People v. Dobbs Ferry Med. Pavillion, 40 A.D.2d 324, 340 N.Y.S.2d 108, affd. 33 N.Y.2d 584, 347 N.Y.S.2d 452, 301 N.E.2d 435). This is not a case where appellant's status is dependent on the right of a person to be substituted for a party (see Legisl......