Opinion
December 8, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (C. Beauchamp Ciparick, J.).
Plaintiff's reliance on Matter of Johnson Newspaper Corp. v Melino ( 77 N.Y.2d 1) for the proposition that disciplinary proceedings against physicians under the Public Health Law are confidential, is misplaced, since, as noted by the IAS Court (citing In re J.L. [McBarnette], NYLJ, Feb. 20, 1992, at 23, col 3 [Sup Ct, N Y County]), Johnson involved a different agency, the Education Department, operating under a different statute and a different policy and tradition from that of the Health Department with respect to the confidentiality of its disciplinary proceedings (compare, Public Health Law § 230, with Education Law § 6510). Defendant's policy of maintaining confidentiality while complaints are investigated, but conducting open proceedings once complaints are substantiated and charges are served is rational and in accord with the strong public policy of this State of assuring public access to administrative proceedings (see, Matter of Herald Co. v Weisenberg, 59 N.Y.2d 378).
Nor was it error for the IAS Court to grant defendant summary judgment without reaching the issues of whether plaintiff was entitled to a hearing, in advance of that on the disciplinary charges, on the reasonableness of defendant's delay in bringing the charges, and whether the version of Public Health Law § 230 as it was prior to its 1991 amendment should govern the disciplinary proceeding. Both of those questions can be addressed after a final determination (see, Public Health Law § 230-c; Matter of Cortlandt Nursing Home v Axelrod, 66 N.Y.2d 169, 179; Matter of Major v Board of Regents, 160 A.D.2d 1041, 1044, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 705).
We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.