Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

18 F.3d 1033

Docket No. 1254, Docket 93-7856.

Mussington v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center

Second Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued March 9, 1994. Decided March 10, 1994.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1994-03-10

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 2003

1 federal appellate ·

3 counsel of record

Relies on Mussington Ex Rel. Jacobs v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1994-03-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Individual citizens, three churches, and three church groups appeal from judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, John S. Martin, Jr., Judge.

Charles S. Sims, Proskauer, Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn, New York City (Edward S. Kornreich, Deborah J. Jacobs, Proskauer, Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn, Patty Lipshutz, St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hosp. Center, of counsel), for defendant-appellee St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hosp. Center.

Barbara K. Hathaway, Asst. Atty. Gen. of the State of N.Y., New York City (G. Oliver Koppell, Atty. Gen. of the State of N.Y., of counsel), for defendants-appellees Dept. of Health and Chassin.

Maya D. Wiley, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., New York City (Elaine R. Jones, Theodore M. Shaw, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., William H. Voth, Steven Shiffman, Arnold & Porter, Kenneth Kimerling, Nina Perales, Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund, Inc., of counsel), for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before: WALKER and JACOBS, Circuit Judges, and CARMAN, Judge.*

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Plaintiffs are individual citizens, three churches, and three church groups who brought suit against St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center (the "Hospital") and New York state health officials to enjoin the Hospital's transfer of pediatric, obstetric, and neonatal care services and medical-surgical beds from their present location in a low-income neighborhood with a high minority population to a site located in a higher-income neighborhood with a lower minority population. Plaintiffs claim that the transfer unlawfully discriminates against Medicaid recipients and minorities and therefore violates the Hill-Burton Act, Titles II and VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Equal Protection Clause. The district court (Martin, J.) determined that the churches and church groups lack standing and that in any event all of the claims are barred: the claims for injunctive relief by laches and those for damages by the statute of limitations. The court's opinion is published at 824 F.Supp. 427 (S.D.N.Y.1993) and familiarity with it is assumed. We agree with the district court's decision that any claims raised in this litigation would be barred by laches or the statute of limitations. We do not reach the other issues raised in the parties' briefs on appeal.

*

Honorable Gregory W. Carman, Judge of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation

/18/f3d/1033 · .json · Public domain