Petitioners' challenges to the reduction of their compensation pursuant to administrative orders of the Supreme Court are not justiciable (see,Matter of Director of Assigned Counsel Plan of City of New York [Bodek], 87 N.Y.2d 191, 194; see also, Matter of Werfel v. Agresta, 36 N.Y.2d 624;Matter of Gilman v. Golfinopoulous, 284 A.D.2d 224, 726 N.Y.S.2d 271). To the extent that petitioners seek a declaration as to the validity of respondent Chief Administrator's rule ( 22 NYCRR 127.2[b], as amended, effective April 16, 2001), allowing administrative review of trial court determinations as to the propriety of fee awards in excess of the limits prescribed in County Law § 722-b, the matter is not, in the first instance, properly before us
Motions seeking leave to file amici curiae briefs granted.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.