Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Perez v. Levy
Citations: 96 A.D.3d 729; 946 N.Y.S.2d 184
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; June 6, 2012; New York; State Appellate Court
An appeal was made regarding the application of Suffolk County Administrative Code A9-6, known as the Mary Hibberd Law, to the defunding and closure of the John J. Foley Skilled Nursing Facility. The plaintiffs, including three patients and an employee of the Facility, sought a judgment declaring that the Law applies to this situation, arguing that the County failed to comply with required procedures for privatizing health services. The plaintiffs moved for summary judgment, while the defendants cross-moved for summary judgment, contending that the Law does not pertain to the closure of the Facility. Additionally, William J. Lindsay, as Presiding Officer of the Suffolk County Legislature, sought to intervene in the case. The Supreme Court of Suffolk County denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, granted the defendants' cross motion, and denied Lindsay's motion to intervene as academic. The court emphasized that the primary aim in statutory interpretation is to ascertain legislative intent, noting that the Law, by its clear language, does not apply to the closure of County facilities but rather to privatization initiatives for health services. Consequently, the court ruled that the Law is inapplicable to the Facility's closure, affirming the denial of the plaintiffs' motion and the granting of the defendants' motion. The appeal court remitted the matter for entry of a judgment confirming that the Mary Hibberd Law does not apply to the Facility's defunding and closure.