Matter of County of Orleans v Shah

Annotate this Case
Matter of County of Orleans v Shah 2016 NY Slip Op 07417 Decided on November 10, 2016 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 10, 2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
58 CA 14-02022

[*1]IN THE MATTER OF COUNTY OF ORLEANS, PETITIONER-PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

v

NIRAV R. SHAH, M.D., M.P.H., COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AND NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, RESPONDENTS-DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.



ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (VICTOR PALADINO OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

WHITEMAN OSTERMAN & HANNA LLP, ALBANY (CHRISTOPHER E. BUCKEY OF COUNSEL), AND NANCY ROSE STORMER, P.C., UTICA, FOR PETITIONER-PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Orleans County (James P. Punch, A.J.), entered October 1, 2014 in a CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action. The judgment, insofar as appealed from, granted the petition-complaint in part, annulled the determination of respondents-defendants and directed respondents-defendants to allow petitioner-plaintiff's claims for reimbursement.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment insofar as appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the petition-complaint is denied in its entirety, and judgment is granted in favor of respondents-defendants as follows:

It is ADJUDGED AND DECLARED that section 61 of part D of section 1 of chapter 56 of the Laws of 2012 has not been shown to be unconstitutional (see Matter of County of Chemung v Shah, ___ NY3d ___ [Oct. 27, 2016]).

Entered: November 10, 2016

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.