Judicial review of a determination regarding academic standards is limited to the issues of whether the challenged determination was arbitrary and capricious, irrational, made in bad faith, or contrary to statute, or to state or federal constitution ( see Matter of Susan M. v. New York Law School, 76 NY2d 241, 247). The judicial deference afforded a determination made by an educational and academic institution has been extended to accredited residency training programs ( see Auguste v. New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens, 260 AD2d 589, 589; Razi v. St. Joseph's Hosp. Health Ctr., 237 AD2d 894; Moukarzel v. Montefiore Med. Ctr., 235 AD2d 239; Meller v. Tancer, 174 AD2d 374). Here, the respondents established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment ( see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324) by demonstrating that the decision to terminate the appellant from the Mt. Sinai residency program was based on the appellant's failure to satisfactorily complete his third-year residency at Maimonides, and the appellant's deliberate omission of information regarding his prior academic record during his interview with Mt. Sinai.