Here the son was sued by the facility in the principal amount of $44,210.11 for room, board, and skilled nursing care services which it provided to the defendant’s mother from January 29, 2010 through August 31, 2010. An admission agreement was signed by the defendant as “responsible party” and plaintiff claimed a breach by defendant’s “failing to pay the moneys due toward the cost of his mother’s care at the facility from his mother’s assets and resources; to the extent those assets and resources may have been insufficient to cover the cost of her care, the plaintiff claims that the defendant breached the terms of the admission agreement by failing to timely file for Medicaid, leaving a gap in coverage for which the plaintiff has not been compensated.”
JOPAL AT ST. JAMES, LLC v. Manning, 2019 NY Slip Op 32720 – NY: Supreme Court, Suffolk County, September 5, 2019:
“While a nursing facility may not require a third-party guarantee of payment to the facility as a condition to admission or a continued stay in the facility, it may, as here, require an individual who has legal access to a resident’s income or resources to provide payment from such income or resources, without incurring personal liability (see 10 NYCRR § 415.3[b][1], [6]).
The plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on its cause of action for breach of contract by demonstrating that the defendant accepted personal responsibility to utilize his access to his mother’s funds to pay for her care, and then breached his contractual obligation by failing to apply available assets toward her care (see Troy Nursing & Rehabilitation Ctr. v Naylor, 94 AD3d 1353, 944 NYS2d 323, lv dismissed 19 NY3d 1045, 954 NYS2d 6 [2012]). The defendant, in opposition, failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The record, however, does not reveal the amount of his mother’s funds to which he had access prior to her death. Irrespective of whether the defendant may also have failed to comply with his Medicaid obligations, he is liable only to the extent that her assets would cover outstanding payments owed to the plaintiff (see Prospect Park Nursing Home v Goutier, 12 Misc 3d 1192[A], 824 NYS2d 770 [2006]). Accordingly, the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment, albeit only on the issue of liability (see Troy Nursing & Rehabilitation Ctr. v Naylor, supra; cf. Presbyterian Home for Cent. NY v Thompson, 136 AD3d 1421, 25 NYS3d 513 [2016]), and the defendant’s cross motion—which is addressed solely to the cause of action for breach of contract, notwithstanding the breadth of relief requested in the notice of cross motion—is correspondingly denied.”