Opinion
June 23, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, the branch of the appellants-respondents' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against them, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as cross-appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the appellants-respondents are awarded one bill of costs.
The plaintiffs seek, inter alia, enforcement of a contract to pay profit distributions calculated, in part, on referrals they and other doctors made to the appellants-respondents' practice. Since this agreement between the parties was illegal because it violated Federal Medicare law ( 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b), was against public policy, and was proscribed by regulations enacted by the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services ( 42 C.F.R. § 1001.952 [d]), it is unenforceable ( see, Long Meadow Assocs. v. City of Glen Cove, 203 A.D.2d 262; Little Princess Truck Rentals v. Pergament Distribs., 143 A.D.2d 179; Nursing Home Consultants v. Quantum Health Servs., 926 F. Supp. 835, affd 112 F.3d 513; Modern Med. Labs. v. Smith-Kline Beecham Clinical Labs., 1994 U.S. Dist LEXIS 11525 [ND Ill]; Medical Dev. Network v. Professional Respiratory Care/Home Med. Equip. Servs., 673 So.2d 565 [Fla]).
In light of this determination, the parties' remaining contentions are academic.
Mangano, P.J., Copertino, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.