Judicial Reports: LexPress: The Masquerade
By Jesse Sunenblick
jsunenblick@judicialstudies.com
Posted: 04-18-08
The City of Newburgh's Police Chief squares off against a City Court judge over an alleged incident of anti-law-enforcement bias. In other news, the tabloids break down the indictment of two City Council staffers on embezzlement charges.
"SOMEONE WITH AN OBVIOUS AGENDA"
The Hudson Valley's Times Herald Record has an article detailing a feud between the City of Newburgh Police Department and City Court Judge Peter Kulkin. After Kulkin dismissed some of the charges against three men who allegedly fought with a Citgo clerk and police officers after a night of drinking, Police Chief Eric Paolilli issued a statement criticizing Kulkin as "someone with an obvious bias and agenda masquerading as an impartial judge." Paolilli's 575-word statement took exception to the judge's closing comments in the case, which Paolilli said amounted to "tacit approval of an individual who broke out the rear window of a police vehicle with his head because he was 'outraged' that his drunken, belligerent companions were being arrested." (Kulkin had questioned the police's account of the drunken belligerence, at one point asking the arresting officer, "What I want to know is, did you get together and cook up some sort of a story?") This isn't Kulkin's first run-in with Newburgh authorities: last year, police and Newburgh Assemblyman Tom Kirwan filed complaints against Kulkin with the state Commission on Judicial Conduct concerning his comments in another case.
THE "TRAVELING ROAD SHOW"
The New York Times offers a narrative account of the Court of Appeals' "traveling road show" Thursday in the Bronx. The state's highest court heard five cases -- involving murder, gender discrimination, terrorism, illegal eviction and a trip-and-fall episode -- before an audience of 450 people in the state's newest, and most controversial courthouse, the Bronx Hall of Justice, which recently opened its doors to complaints of dead radio space, a tilting parking garage, and long lines. "We wanted to celebrate the new courthouse and to bring the court to the community," said Chief judge Judith Kaye.
The Daily News, meanwhile, breaks down the indictments of two City Council staffers on charges of embezzling $145,000 in tax money and surmises that it could be just the tip of the iceberg. Before being stolen, the money had been placed in shadowy discretionary funds (a common practice) and then converted to an allegedly fake nonprofit group (hopefully not so common) intended to provide tutoring services in Flatbush, Brooklyn. For years, prosecutors announced, the Council has placed such discretionary funds in nonexistent organizations, allowing the speaker and other council members to use the money for preferred programs without the mayor's approval. "Without transparency and accountability in the budget process, discretionary items are ripe for abuse," said Manhattan U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia. "This investigation will continue to take a hard look at this process, scrutinizing those allocations most vulnerable to abuse by those in positions of public trust."
OF MEDICAID AND NAIVE HOSPITALS
Finally, The Staten Island Advance reports on Staten Island Acting Supreme Court Justice Judge McMahon's dismissal of a multimillion dollar lawsuit by Staten Island University Hospital against a contractor it claims misled it about non-reimbursable social work services. In the late 1990s, SIUH paid over $100 million to settle two fraud cases filed by then-Attorney General Eliot Spitzer which accused the hospital of overbilling. Amid the investigations, SIUH filed suit against Comprehensive Habilitation Services -- a contracter it had hired to manage several off-site clinics -- claiming the company misled SIUH by saying its services were reimbursable through Medicaid (they weren't). But McMahon tossed the suit, finding that "SIUH is not an institution naive or unintelligent regarding health-care reimbursement or medical billing...In fact, SIUH is a sophisticated health-care facility that possesses a keen familiarity with the Medicaid reimbursement program through the vast services provided at the hospital itself, and its numerous subsidiaries." Moreover, Comprehensive's contract did not require it to "impart any recommendations or guidance regarding the plaintiff's billing practices for the social-work services," McMahon wrote.
Posted by Jesse on April 18, 2008 09:27 AM to Judicial Reports