From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Doe v. Doar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 3, 2006
26 A.D.3d 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

CA 05-02100.

February 3, 2006.

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (David D. Egan, J.), entered August 5, 2005 in a declaratory judgment action. The judgment, among other things, granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and declared 18 NYCRR 352.2 (b) to be invalid as in conflict with Social Services Law § 131-c.

ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (OREN L. ZEVE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

EMPIRE JUSTICE CENTER, ROCHESTER (BRYAN D. HETHERINGTON OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

Present: Kehoe, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Pine and Hayes, JJ.


It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs for reasons stated at Supreme Court ( see also Matter of Melendez v. Wing, 21 AD3d 129, 131-133).


Summaries of

Doe v. Doar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 3, 2006
26 A.D.3d 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Doe v. Doar

Case Details

Full title:MARY DOE, by Her Mother and Next Friend, JANE DOE, et al., Respondents, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Feb 3, 2006

Citations

26 A.D.3d 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 802
807 N.Y.S.2d 909

Citing Cases

Melendez v. Wing

Housing Works, Inc., New York City ( Armen H. Merjian of counsel), for Zoraida Melendez, respondent. I. The…

Matter of Schweiger v. Hansell

The agency then obtained a repayment agreement from the mother and retained the right to pursue recovery…