Opinion
No. 13
03-25-2021
In the Matter of PEOPLE CARE INCORPORATED, Doing Business as Assisted Care, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATION, et al., Appellants.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Eric Lee, Devin Slack and Scott Shorr of counsel), for appellants. Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP, New York City (Thomas J. Fleming and Kerrin T. Klein of counsel), and Todd V. Lamb, New York City, for respondent. Lettitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Matthew W. Grieco, Barbara D. Underwood, and Steven C. Wu of counsel), for New York State Department of Health, amicus curiae.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Eric Lee, Devin Slack and Scott Shorr of counsel), for appellants.
Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP, New York City (Thomas J. Fleming and Kerrin T. Klein of counsel), and Todd V. Lamb, New York City, for respondent.
Lettitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Matthew W. Grieco, Barbara D. Underwood, and Steven C. Wu of counsel), for New York State Department of Health, amicus curiae.
OPINION OF THE COURT
MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the matter remitted to the Appellate Division for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal to that Court.
For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion below ( Matter of People Care Inc. v. City of New York, 175 A.D.3d 134, 147–152, 106 N.Y.S.3d 32 [1st Dept. 2020] [Richter, J.P., dissenting]), we conclude that the funds for personal care services paid to petitioner People Care, Inc. under the Health Care Reform Act ( Public Health Law §§ 2807–v[1][bb][i], [iii] ) are Medicaid funds subject to the audit and recoupment authority of the City of New York Human Resources Administration (HRA) in accordance with the parties' 2001 contract. In light of our holding, we do not address HRA's contentions regarding whether petitioner must follow the contractual dispute resolution procedures or the merits of HRA's recoupment demand, issues that were not decided by the Appellate Division.
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia and Wilson concur.
Order reversed, with costs, and matter remitted to the Appellate Division, First Department, for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal to that Court, in a memorandum.