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 MADELINE L. BRYER, Appellant, v. FAMILY COURT PANEL PLAN et al., Respondents.

Respondent's determination not to recertify petitioner to the Family Court Panel did not deprive petitioner of her constitutional right to due process, the rules pertaining to recertification ( 22 NYCRR 611.4, 611.5), unlike that pertaining to complaints against panel members concerning their professional conduct ( 22 NYCRR 611.8), requiring neither a hearing nor a written statement of reasons (see, Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564; Schwartz v. Mayor's Comm. on Judiciary, 816 F.2d 54). Nor does an issue of fact exist whether the determination was made in bad faith (cf., Matter of Cohen v. Koehler, 82 N.Y.2d 882), respondent having submitted sufficient evidence that the Committee member claimed to have a conflict of interest had recused herself from all proceedings involving petitioner's recertification.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF BRYER v. FAMILY COURT PANEL PLAN
(Jun 21, 1994)