From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Mirilashvili v. Dowling

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 7, 1995
213 A.D.2d 175 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 7, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [Joan B. Lobis, J.].


The Commissioner's determination, rendered after a full evidentiary hearing, to exclude the petitioner from the Medicaid Program for a period of five years, based upon the petitioner's delegation of medical treatment to an unlicensed person, was supported by substantial evidence adduced at the hearing. It was established that the petitioner had engaged in unacceptable practices under the Medicaid Regulations ( 18 NYCRR 515.2) by submitting false claims for unfurnished medical care, making false and fraudulent misrepresentations of material facts in claiming Medicaid payments, and in delegating professional responsibilities to an unlicensed person (Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231).

Nor was the penalty of a five year exclusion from the Medicaid Program imposed excessive or so disproportionate to the petitioner's offense so as to be shocking to one's conscience. Medicaid Regulations (18 N.Y.CRR) § 515.3 provides that upon a determination that a provider has been or is engaged in an unacceptable practice, including having made a false claim or claims for unfurnished medical care ( 18 NYCRR 515.2), the Department may impose one or more sanctions, including exclusion from participation in the Medicaid Program, with Statewide effect. The Court of Appeals has held that a permanent disqualification from the Medicaid Program is not an excessive penalty for a single act of fraudulent billing (Schaubman v Blum, 49 N.Y.2d 375).

The Department is entitled to the proceeds of the $46,664 bond posted by the petitioner to compensate the Department for the Medicaid payments made to the petitioner while his exclusion from the Medicaid Program was stayed by this Court. The record reveals that the petitioner has been properly excluded from the Medicaid Program, and the appeal is therefore decided adversely to the petitioner (CPLR 6312 [b]).

We have reviewed the petitioner's remaining claims and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Ross, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Mirilashvili v. Dowling

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 7, 1995
213 A.D.2d 175 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of Mirilashvili v. Dowling

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MOSHE B. MIRILASHVILI, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL J. DOWLING…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Mar 7, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 175 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
623 N.Y.S.2d 239

Citing Cases

Gray v. Wing

Petitioner did not divest the agency of jurisdiction by choosing to resign from the Medicaid panel ( see,…