Senate Bill S7676

                                
 
BILL NUMBER: S7676

SPONSOR: BONACIC
 
TITLE OF BILL:  An act to amend the civil practice law and rules, in
relation to electronic filing; to amend chapter 237 of the laws of 2015,
amending the judiciary law and other laws relating to use of electronic
means for the commencement and filing of papers in certain actions and
proceedings, in relation to the use of electronic means for the
commencement and filing of papers in certain actions and proceedings;
and to repeal paragraph 2-a of subdivision (b) of section 2111 of the
civil practice law and rules, relating to residential foreclosure
actions involving a home loan

This measure is being introduced at the request of the Chief Judge of
the State and the Chief Administrative Judge.

As far back as 1999, the State began to introduce pilot programs in the
use of electronic means to commence certain categories of cases and to
file court papers with judges and with adverse parties ("e-filing"). See
L. 1999, c. 367. In the years since, those programs have been continued
and progressively expanded - to apply to a broader spectrum of cases in
additional courts. As has been well-documented in numerous analyses and
reports prepared over the years to assess the effectiveness of e-filing
              

in New York's State courts, the pilot programs have been very successful
and been greeted with great enthusiasm by both bench and bar.

Recognizing this, the Legislature, in 2015 (L. 2015, c. 237), made
several major changes in the statutes authorizing use of e-filing
programs, to make them available on a more permanent and extended basis.
These changes included (i) conferral of permanent authority upon the
Chief Administrative Judge, with the agreement of County Clerks in
affected counties and subject to categorical exclusion for certain case
types (i.e., matrimonial actions, CPLR Article 70 and 78 proceedings,
MHL proceedings, Election Law proceedings and certain residential fore-
closure and consumer debt proceedings), to require mandatory e-filing in
Supreme Court civil parts in such counties and classes of cases as he or
she shall specify; (ii) continued authorization, subject to a September
1, 2019 sunset, for use of e-filing, both consensual and mandatory, in
criminal superior courts and Family Court; (iii) conferral of permanent
authority upon the Chief Administrative Judge to institute programs of
consensual and mandatory e-filing in Surrogate's Court and the New York
City Civil Court; and programs for consensual e-filing (and filing by
FAX) in the Court of Claims; (iv) authorization for use of e-filing in
the Appellate Divisions at the discretion of each Judicial Department
subject only to the same case exclusions for mandatory e-filing as are
applied in the trial courts; and (v) relocation of statutes governing
e-filing from the State's Unconsolidated Laws to appropriate locations
in the Consolidated Laws. Last session, the Legislature built upon this
framework by eliminating the exclusions from mandatory e-filing in the
Appellate Divisions. L. 2017, c. 99.

The instant measure, following in the spirit of the 2015 legislation,
would make several further changes in the e-filing statutes - for the
purpose of enabling fuller deployment of what has been amply demon-
strated to be a practical and economically sound use of technology to
enable optimally expeditious and effective exchange of papers by parties
to a lawsuit between themselves and with the court.  The measure calls
for:

*elimination of the present exclusion of matrimonial actions from manda-
tory e-filing programs in Supreme Court. E-filing in matrimonial cases
has long been used on a consensual basis and all indications are that
requiring its use in those cases would be no less appropriate than it is
in other classes of cases that now are subject to mandatory e-filing.
Also, we are advised that there are many in the matrimonial bar, along
with most County Clerks, who strongly favor extending mandatory e-filing
to matrimonial actions for many reasons not least of which is the fact
that maintaining dual-track filing systems is cumbersome and costly.

*elimination of the present exclusion as to residential foreclosure and
consumer debt actions from mandatory e-filing programs in Supreme Court.
Under present law, other than for purposes of initial filings in these
cases and, until September 1, 2018 (see L. 2017, c. 99), with exemption
for certain statutorily-stipulated counties where mandatory e-filing was
in effect prior to 2015, e-filing may not be made mandatory in these
cases. And, yet, the experience we have had in the exempt counties since
2015 has been highly positive, with no indication of problems that would
contraindicate continued application of mandatory e-filing in them
beyond the coming sunset, or, indeed, that would dictate against perma-
nent elimination of the existing exclusion for the benefit of practi-
tioners in all counties.

*a reset of the September 1, 2019 sunset for use of e-filing in criminal
and Family Court so that it will be two years after such use actually
begins. As it is unclear at this time exactly when pilot e-filing
programs can be rolled out in these courts, having a fixed sunset makes
little sense. In all likelihood, it will necessitate periodic trips back
to the Legislature to re-up the sunset so as to permit a future pilot to
go forth. A more practical approach, as promoted in this measure, would
be for the sunset to be revised so that it is geared to kick in only
after a pilot program is put in place.

This measure, which would have no fiscal impact on the State or local
government, would take effect immediately.   
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

None. New proposal.