91 A.D.3d 1224
N.Y. App. Div.2012Background
- Petitioner, a nursing home resident, had Medicaid denied due to excess income and resources; fair hearing requested.
- Respondent increased wife’s asset allotment to enable purchase of a single premium immediate life annuity and remanded to purge excess resources.
- Petitioner initiated CPLR article 78 challenging the determination and seeking counsel fees; Supreme Court granted petition and awarded fees.
- Court of Appeals remitted to address petitioner’s federal claim for attorney fees; on remand Supreme Court awarded over $100,000 in fees and costs.
- Respondent appealed the fee award; petitioner cross-appealed only from the fee-amount judgment; issues centered on federal-law viability of the annuity method and fee entitlement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the annuity method to increase CSRA violates 42 USC 1396r-5 (e)(2)(C) | Giaquinto argued the method violates the statute. | Respondent contends the annuity method is permitted under federal law. | Annuit y method permitted; no federal violation. |
| Whether petitioner is a prevailing party entitled to counsel fees under 42 USC §§ 1983 and 1988 | Petitioner prevailed on a federal claim warranting fees. | No entitlement absent successful federal claim. | Petitioner not a prevailing party; fees denied on federal claim. |
| Whether the law-of-the-case doctrine barred addressing the federal claim on remand | Law-of-the-case precluded reconsideration of federal issues. | Law-of-the-case did not bar addressing the federal claim here. | Law-of-the-case did not bar consideration; merits addressed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Tomeck, 8 NY3d 724 (NY 2007) (minimum maintenance needs allowance and CSRA framework)
- Wisconsin Dept. of Health & Family Servs. v. Blumer, 534 US 473 (U.S. 2002) (federal framework for community spouse protections)
- Matter of Golf v. New York State Dept. of Social Servs., 91 NY2d 656 (NY 1998) (CSRA calculation methods recognized by NY courts)
- Johnson v. Lodge, 673 F. Supp. 2d 613 (MD Tenn. 2009) (annuity method not arithmetically mandated)