Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Piasecki v. Department of Social Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 5, 1996Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTom, J.

I concur in the result reached by the majority that the finding of the respondent agency was supported by substantial evidence and that because of the potential harm to which the petitioner’s patients were exposed, the five-year exclusion of petitioner from the Medicaid program is appropriate. I also concur in the finding that the restitution sought by the agency is an abuse of discretion and would annul that portion of the penalty.

18 NYCRR part 518 provides, however, that the agency is entitled to recoup overpayments. I would, therefore, remand the matter of the appropriate restitution to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dickerson v. PopolizioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  2. Keenan v. New York State Liquor AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API