Chief Judge DiFiore, senate and assembly chairs announce introduction of constitutional amendment for court reform

March 3, 2022 Brooklyn Eagle Staff

NY State Chief Judge Janet DiFiore. AP Photo/Mike Groll

Share this:

New York State Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Brad Hoylman (D-Manhattan) and Assembly Judiciary Committee Chair Charles D. Lavine (D-Glen Cove) on Thursday announced the introduction of proposals to achieve long-overdue reform and simplification of the state’s overly complicated court structure by merging the current 11 trial courts.

This would bring New York into line with the other states, many of which, including California and New Jersey, have only one or two trial courts.

If enacted, the amendment would enhance access to justice by untangling a labyrinthian system that is hundreds of years old. The new structure would save millions in legal costs for low-income litigants, provide a greater platform for advancement and promotion of judges, and allow greater flexibility for judges to be assigned where needed.

The proposal consolidates New York’s major trial courts into the State Supreme Court and consolidates the trial courts of lesser jurisdiction (not including the Village Justice Courts) into a new statewide Municipal Court. It permits the Legislature, once every 10 years, to adjust the number and boundaries of the appellate Judicial Departments.

State Senate Judiciary Chair Brad Hoylman. AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews

The current structure causes undue misery and expense for those moving through the system. For example, a woman seeking divorce in a criminally abusive relationship might need to travel to three separate courts – even hiring three separate attorneys – to deal with criminal charges, custody issues and divorce proceedings.

“New York State’s trial court structure remains one of the most antiquated and convoluted in the country — a system with 11 different trial courts that has not been updated in decades. While unintentional, the state’s obsolete trial court structure has created barriers to justice that disparately impact our most vulnerable New Yorkers. We must modernize our outdated trial court structure in remedying these inequities and transforming our court system into a model of efficiency. I am thankful to Chairs Hoylman and Lavine for their leadership on this vital issue,” said Chief Judge DiFiore.

Key Points:

In the present system litigants and lawyers must navigate between multiple courts to secure complete relief.
Court consolidation could save hundreds of millions of dollars annually by reducing litigation costs that result from lessened productivity, lost wages, attorneys’ fees and related expenses.
Implementation of any court systemwide improvement (technological, procedural, etc.) must be configured to the multiple types of courts, which, due to their different jurisdictions and provenance, are presently subject to varying statutory and regulatory procedures and systems. This adds greatly to the cost of such improvements.
A consolidated court structure will make it far easier for court administrators to redistribute personnel and other resources to meet court needs than the present system with 11 separate trial courts, each with its particular procedures, history, legal culture and, sometimes, legislative lobby.
A consolidated court structure will accelerate the ongoing diversification of the judiciary and provide greater access to opportunity for advancement for judges across the judiciary.
Faced with the present constitutional cap on authorizing additional Supreme Court justices, court administrators have long resorted to extensive use of the power of temporary judicial assignment from the lower courts to meet court needs, especially in New York City. This results in an insufficient number of judges in those courts and leads to further delays.
Court consolidation will provide the Legislature with a platform to review/rewrite the State’s procedural statutes, which have not been recodified in 50 years or more, to reflect decades of new technology and case law development.

The reforms would require an amendment to the State Constitution. For that to happen, both houses of the State Legislature must vote to approve the measure for two consecutive sessions. Then it is put before the voters as a referendum.

Assembly Judiciary Committee Chair Charles Lavine. AP Photo/Hans Pennink

The Senate amendment introduced by Chairperson Hoylman is S8424, and the Assembly amendment introduced by Chairperson Lavine is A9401.

Hon. Jeh Johnson commented, “I commend Chief Judge DiFiore for her continued commitment to equal justice in the New York State court system, featured front and center in her annual State of the Judiciary address delivered last week. In the report I issued in October 2020 on equal justice in our court system, I noted a “second class system of justice” and a “dehumanizing” and “demeaning” culture in the Housing, Family, Civil and Criminal courts of New York City.”

Andrew Brown, president of the New York State Bar Association, said, “Chief Judge Janet DiFiore’s bold plan to merge and modernize New York’s courts has the unequivocal support of the New York State Bar Association. For more than four decades, the New York Bar has advocated for simplifying New York’s convoluted system of courts, which are exceedingly inefficient, inordinately complex, and extremely costly.”

Kathryn Wylde, president and CEO of the Partnership for New York City, commented,

“The city’s business community has been increasingly frustrated with delays and structural inefficiency in the court system, which are issues that the reforms proposed by the chief judge’s address. We urge the adoption of these reforms as promptly as possible so that the long-overdue streamlining of the courts can begin.”

Hon. Jonathan Lippman, former NYS chief judge, said, “As the former chief judge of New York, I know firsthand the urgent need to simplify and streamline the structure of our trial courts. Chief Judge DiFiore’s proposal will create a court system that is more efficient and cost effective, while promoting diversity, fairness and equity.”