In Matter of Goodwin v. Perales (120 AD2d 527 [2d Dept 1986]), petitioner Goodwin alleged that the State's reimbursement method was a denial of equal protection under the Federal and State Constitutions. ( Matter of Goodwin v. Perales, 120 AD2d, at 527.) The Second Department explicitly rejected this claim, holding that the State's interpretation of the Social Security Act and the New York Social Services Law is "both rational and in accordance with the express language of the applicable statutes and regulations" and that these statutes and regulations "do not require a month-by-month recoupment analysis, as suggested by the petitioners." ( Matter of Goodwin v. Perales, 120 AD2d, at 528.)