Opinion
August 8, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, the cross motion is granted, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.
A Medicaid provider does not have a constitutionally-protected property right to continued participation in the Medicaid program (see, Matter of Rivero v. Perales, 185 A.D.2d 350). The relationship between a provider and the State is contractual in nature and is terminable by either party without cause upon 30 days written notice (see, 18 NYCRR 504.7 [a]; Matter of Bora v New York State Dept. of Social Servs., 152 A.D.2d 10). Since the petitioner's participation was terminated without cause pursuant to 18 NYCRR 504.7 (a), he was not entitled to a hearing (see, Matter of Rivero v. Perales, supra, at 350; Matter of Bora v. New York State Dept. of Social Servs., supra, at 10). The reason for the termination was not arbitrary or capricious, as the New York State Department of Social Services (hereinafter DSS) has broad discretion in administering the program to adequately protect the public interest in assuring that funds are not dispensed to untrustworthy providers (see, Schaubman v. Blum, 49 N.Y.2d 375, 379-380). The fact that the DSS allegedly found no evidence of wrongdoing is not determinative, because the petitioner's participation was terminated without cause.
The decision of DSS to proceed under 18 NYCRR 504.7 (a) rather than to terminate the petitioner's participation for cause pursuant to 18 NYCRR 504.7 (b) and parts 515 and 519 was not arbitrary and capricious nor made in bad faith. The DSS did not impermissibly circumvent the petitioner's right to a hearing (see, Matter of Bora v. New York State Dept. of Social Servs., supra, at 13). Nor did the petitioner have a right to a name-clearing hearing. The petitioner was not subject to the stigma and sanctions resulting from a termination of participation for cause and did not demonstrate that DSS publicly disseminated the reason it terminated the petitioner's participation (see, Matter of Bezar v. New York State Dept. of Social Servs., 151 A.D.2d 44, 50; Matter of Bora v. New York State Dept. of Social Servs., supra, at 14). Ritter, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.