LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

NEW YORK STATE CLINICAL LAB. ASSN v KALADJIAN Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: NEW YORK STATE CLINICAL LAB. ASSN, State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>085_0346, State Eaja, Prevailing Party, Petitioner, Fee Award, Laboratory, Respondent, Meaning, Social Services, Cplr Article, Matter, York, Appeals, Pursuant, Amended Regulation, Interpretation, Commissioner, Equal Access, Justice Act, Independent Laboratories, Bill Jacket, Government, Reasonableness, Appellant, Acting Commissioner, Partially Prevailing, Usc, Appellate Division , ContentID: 120250855

Case Documents
1 1995-02-23 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 124764
8 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 8 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PREVAILING PARTY
PETITIONER
FEE AWARD
LABORATORY
LITIGATION
RESPONDENT
MEANING
COURT
SOCIAL SERVICES
CPLR ARTICLE
MATTER
YORK
APPEALS
PURSUANT
AMENDED REGULATION
INTERPRETATION
COMMISSIONER
EQUAL ACCESS
JUSTICE ACT
INDEPENDENT LABORATORIES
BILL JACKET
PLAINTIFF
GOVERNMENT
REASONABLENESS
APPELLANT
ACTING COMMISSIONER
PARTIALLY PREVAILING
USC
APPELLATE DIVISION


  IN THE MATTER OF NEW YORK STATE CLINICAL LABORATORY ASSOCIATION INC.,
  APPELLANT, v. GREGORY KALADJIAN, AS ACTING COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
  SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT.

    85 N.Y.2d 346, 649 N.E.2d 811, 625 N.Y.S.2d 463 (1995).
    February 23, 1995

   3 No. 14 (1995 NY Int. 047)
   Decided February 23, 1995
     _________________________________________________________________

   This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
   in the New York Reports.

   Thomas G. Smith, for Appellant.
   Daniel Smirlock, for Respondent.

   CIPARICK, J.:

   The issue presented on this appeal is whether a partially prevailing
   petitioner may recover attorney's fees from the State pursuant to CPLR
   article 86, the Equal Access to Justice Act (State EAJA). This
   petitioner is not entitled to a fee award because it is not a
   "prevailing party" within the meaning of the State EAJA and the
   State's position in this litigation was substantially justified.

   In October 1991, respondent Department of Social Services amended 18
   NYCRR 505.7, changing the Medicaid payment methodology for certain
   diagnostic laboratory tests performed by independent laboratories. 18
   NYCRR 505.7(g)(4) provides:

     Payment for laboratory services provided by independent
     laboratories will be made only for individually ordered tests. No
     payment will be made for tests ordered as groupings or combinations
     of tests or for individual tests ordered on a laboratory order form
     issued by an independent laboratory which also contains an order
     for one or more groups or combinations of tests. Each test must be
     separately ordered by a qualified practitioner as defined in
     paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

   Prior to the amendment, independent laboratories were entitled to
   receive payment for tests ordered by physicians on pre-printed
   laboratory requisition forms containing "panels" or "profiles." Panels
   are groups of tests conducted on a single specimen, and profiles are
   groups of tests performed for the purpose of assessing the function of
   a particular body organ or tissue. Although laboratory tests could be
SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE MATTER OF NEW YORK STATE CLINICAL LABORATORY ASSOCIATION INC.,
  • APPELLANT, v. GREGORY KALADJIAN, AS ACTING COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
  • SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT.
  • Thomas G. Smith, for Appellant.
  • The issue presented on this appeal is whether a partially prevailing petitioner may recover
  • This petitioner is not entitled to a fee award because it is not a "prevailing party" within
  • In October 1991, respondent Department of Social Services amended 18 NYCRR 505.7, changing
  • Petitioner commenced this article 78 proceeding alleging that the amended regulation lacked a
  • Supreme Court granted the petition to the extent of declaring section 505.7null and void on
  • The court also declared that respondent's interpretation of the amended regulation was
  • The Appellate Division modified by reversing so much of Supreme Court's judgment as declared
  • the court concluded that there was no basis for an award of counsel fees pursuant to 42 USC §
  • The statute was enacted to "improve access to justice for individuals and businesses who may
  • Four requirements must be met before a court can award fees to a private litigant under the
  • The "prevailing party" standard has been described as a "generous formulation that brings the
  • Despite the Supreme Court's decision in Hensley, the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of
  • The legislative history of the State EAJA indicates that New York courts should look to the
  •    |