BRAD H. v. CITY OF NEW YORK

Medicaid eligibility depends upon verification of the application ( see Social Services Law § 366-a[a],[3][a]; Hope v. Perales, 83 N.Y.2d 563, 572-73), and modification of the stipulation to give defendants more time within which to verify information and complete the reactivation process was necessary to comply with state law ( see Rampe v. Guiliani, 281 A.D.2d 609, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 716). Plaintiffs' contention that the court had no basis for finding the normal course of investigation takes seven days is belied by the record, which includes an affidavit detailing the reactivation steps and demonstrating why defendants required that much time to complete the process.

The stipulation of settlement needed further modification, pursuant to Social Services Law § 133, to require the grant of temporary Medicaid benefits pending the completion of an investigation for class members in immediate need. The language of the statute is clear, providing for temporary assistance and care pending any investigation relating to benefit eligibility. By definition, temporary assistance and care includes "medical assistance for needy persons" (Social Services Law § 2, § 363). Contrary to defendants' contention, § 133 is applicable to Medicaid benefits ( see e.g. Henrietta D. v. Guiliani, 119 F. Supp.2d 181, 215 [ED NY], appeal dismissed 246 F.3d 176).

We have considered defendants' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.