Opinion
July 17, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner's contention that her due process rights were violated because she was not given sufficient notice of the respondent New York State Commissioner of Social Service's burial assistance program for recipients of public assistance lacks merit. Complete legal notice of the program, pursuant to New York City Charter former § 1105 (b), was provided by publication of the proposed regulations in the City Record on June 15, 1988, and of the final regulations on July 27, 1989 (see, Matter of Berdecia v. Perales, 188 A.D.2d 311, 312). Moreover, when, as here, beneficiaries of a program are unknown at the time of its inception (the deceased, as well as the petitioner, did not become recipients of public assistance until 1991), "employment of an indirect and even a probably futile means of notification is all that the situation permits and creates no constitutional bar to a final decree foreclosing their rights" (Mullane v Central Hanover Bank Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 316; Grueschow v Harris, 633 F.2d 1264). Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.