§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of County of Chautauqua, Appellant,v.Nirav R. Shah,, et al., Respondents.

Brief

47 Cited authorities

  1. Colavito v. New York Organ Donor Network, Inc.

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 9320 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 650 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that survivors' limited right to control the burial of a deceased relative did not imply a general, common-law property right in body parts

  2. Simonds v. Simonds

    45 N.Y.2d 233 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 561 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an interest obtained through an agreement supported by consideration “is superior to that of a named beneficiary who has given no consideration”

  3. Klostermann v. Cuomo

    61 N.Y.2d 525 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 411 times
    In Klostermann, the public agencies involved were in repeated noncompliance with the command of Mental Hygiene Law § 29.15 (g), which required preparation of a written service plan, with prescribed contents, for every person discharged from state psychiatric hospitals.

  4. Matter of Brusco v. Braun

    84 N.Y.2d 674 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 281 times
    In Brusco, for example, the Article 78 proceeding sought to compel the issuance of a judgment to which the Petitioner was entitled by law.

  5. Thyroff v. Nationwide

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 2442 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 190 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that computer files could be the subject of a conversion claim, where plaintiff was entirely denied use of those files

  6. Matter of Gross v. Perales

    72 N.Y.2d 231 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 267 times
    Finding that incidental damages are money that the agency is required to pay upon the annulment or nullification of the underlying administrative action, i.e., the agency would still have been obligated to reimburse the petitioner even had the petitioner not requested it

  7. Matter of the Estate of Witbeck

    245 A.D.2d 848 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)   Cited 96 times
    Denying motion to dismiss complaint for unjust enrichment because claim was at law and brought within limitations period

  8. Matter of Hodes v. Axelrod

    70 N.Y.2d 364 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 125 times
    Holding that the application of an amended statute permitting the revocation of a nursing home operating certificate based on an operator's industry-related felony convictions does not impair the operator's vested rights, even though the operator had successfully litigated the automatic revocation under the preexisting law

  9. Brothers v. Florence

    95 N.Y.2d 290 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 80 times
    Holding that it was unreasonable to apply an amended statute of limitations that shortened the time in which to file medical-malpractice claims to a suit that, upon passage of the new statute of limitations, was to be filed within four months rather than within the significantly longer time under the old statute, given the diligent pursuit of the claim by the plaintiff from the time of accrual

  10. Rhem v. Malcolm

    507 F.2d 333 (2d Cir. 1974)   Cited 158 times
    Holding that the imposition of maximum security confinement, including lock-ins that lasted 16 hours per day, violated the due process rights of some pre-trial detainees

  11. Section 635.1 - Reimbursement for medical assistance (MA)

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 18 § 635.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) Reimbursement for services provided to recipients of MA shall be claimed on schedules and formats prescribed by the department and in accordance with instructions of the department. Any amounts which are federally reimbursable pursuant to title XIX of the Social Security Act or another Federal program or activity must be claimed in a manner that results in the greatest proportion of Federal participation or alternatively must be claimed in a manner that does not increase the amount of State reimbursement