AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

In the Matter of GERDA BARTNIK et al., Respondents, v. THOMAS A. MAUL, as Commissioner of the State of New York Office of Mental Retardation and De

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs to the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs, the determination is reinstated, the motion to dismiss the amended petition is granted, and the amended petition is dismissed.

The petitioners failed to establish that they had standing to bring the instant petition (see, Mental Hygiene Law § 41.34 [c] [1] [C]). While individuals may have standing to bring a proceeding to challenge the Commissioner's ultimate determination based on over concentration and substantial alteration (see, Matter of Town of Hempstead v Commissioner of State of N.Y. Off. of Mental Retardation Dev. Disabilities, 119 A.D.2d 582), the petitioners failed to allege over concentration in either their original or amended petitions (see, Matter of Talisman Dr. Civic Assn. v Webb, 138 A.D.2d 610).

In light of our determination we need not reach the remaining issues raised by the parties. Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF BARTNIK v. MAUL
(Jan 8, 1996)