Citation Numbers: 20 A.D.3d 914, 798 N.Y.S.2d 831, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7394
Filed Date: 7/1/2005
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
Appeal from a judgment (denominated order and judgment) of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Edward D. Garni, J.), entered January 7, 2004 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the petition is granted in part and the matter is remitted to respondent Commissioner of Onondaga County Department of Social Services for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: We agree with petitioner that Supreme Court erred in dismissing her petition seeking, inter alia, to annul the determination of respondent Commissioner of Onondaga County Department of Social Services (OCDSS) denying her individual application for safety net assistance {see generally Social Services Law § 157 et seq.). As a preliminary matter, we note that, as petitioner correctly contends,
Respondents contend that administrative directive 01 ADM-3 was sufficient authority to deny petitioner’s individual application for safety net assistance. We disagree. Contrary to respondents’ contention, the provisions of Social Services Law §§ 131-c and 158 and 18 NYCRR 350.2, 370.2, and 370.4 do not vest respondents with the requisite authority to treat applicants for safety net benefits differently from applicants for family assistance benefits. Because we can discern no rational basis for respondents’ interpretation of the relevant statutes and regulations for the creation of the administrative directive that petitioner may not apply as an individual for safety net assistance (see generally Matter of Marzec v DeBuono, 95 NY2d 262, 266 [2000], rearg denied 96 NY2d 731 [2001]), and because that administrative directive conflicts with the express language of 18 NYCRR former 352.30 (a), we conclude that the administrative directive is unreasonable and that 18 NYCRR former 352.30 (a) controls (see generally Matter of Harbolic v Berger, 43 NY2d 102, 109 [1977]; Ostrer v Schenck, 41 NY2d 782, 785-786 [1977]). We therefore grant the petition in part by annulling the determination, and we remit the matter to respondent Commissioner of OCDSS for a de novo determination of petitioner’s individual application for safety net assistance as of November 17, 2002, the date on which petitioner’s public assistance benefits