Senate Bill S7697

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S7697

SPONSOR: HOYLMAN-SIGAL
 
TITLE OF BILL:

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY proposing an amendment
to sections 11 and 16 of article 6 of the constitution, in relation to
the civil jurisdiction of county and district courts

2.

 
SOURCE OF BILL:

This bill is being introduced at the request of the Judiciary.

3.

 
PURPOSE OF BILL:

This bill would permit designation of former housing judges of the Hous-
ing Part of the New York City Civil Court as judicial hearing officers
("JHOs").
              

4.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 of the bill amends section 850(1) of the Judiciary Law to add
former judges of the Housing Part of the New York City Civil Court to
the list of those persons eligible for designation as JHOs by the Chief
Administrative Judge. In addition, the bill eliminates an obsolete
reference to City Courts "not of record."{1}

Section 2 of the bill provides that the bill shall be effective imme-
diately.

5.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

In 1983, on the recommendation of the Judiciary and the Lindsay Commit-
tee,{2} the Legislature created the quasi-judicial office of Judicial
Hearing Officer ("JHO"). See Judiciary Law Art. 22.  Following desig-
nation as a JHO by the Chief Administrator of the Courts, a former judge
could be assigned to serve as a referee in civil and criminal liti-
gation. Id. To qualify for such designation, a person would need to: (i)
have served as a judge or justice of a court of record of the Unified
Court System{3} but no longer be in judicial service; and (ii) have the
mental and physical capacity to perform the duties of a JHO. Judiciary
Law § 850. Also, the Chief Administrator must have determined that the
services of such former judge or justice were "necessary to expedite the
business of the courts." Id.

This bill would extend eligibility to serve as JHOs to former housing
judges of the Housing Part of the New York City Civil Court. While these
officers are referred to in statute as "judges" (see New York City Civil
Court Act § 110(e)), they technically are not judges of the Unified
Court System, but instead quasi-judicial officers because no reference
is made to their office in Article VI of the State Constitution. See Met
Council v. Crosson, 84 NY2d 328 (1994).  Nonetheless, by statute, their
quasi-judicial functions in presiding over proceedings in the Housing
Part of the Civil Court are effectively judicial functions. See New York
City Civil Court Act § 110(e) {providing that actions and proceedings in
the Housing Part "shall be tried before civil court judges, acting civil
court judges , and housing judges" (emphasis added))}; Glass v. Thomp-
son, 51 AD2d 69 (2d Dept., 1976) {finding that housing judges (then
called "hearing officers") exercised judicial functions when presiding
over housing matters}. Hence, in terms of their experience as jurists,
former housing judges may be considered no less qualified than Article
VI Judges of the Civil Court for deployment as JHOs.  Accordingly,
making them eligible for JHO designation will provide the Judiciary with
a wealth of talent and experience that can be tapped to help address the
large caseloads faced daily by the courts.

6.

 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2023-2024: OCA 71

7.

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

This bill would have no meaningful State fiscal impact.

8.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This bill would take effect immediately.
{1} As of 1988, all City Courts were constituted as "courts of record."
See L. 1988, c. 397, § 10; Judiciary Law § 2.
{2} The Lindsay Committee, chaired by former New York City Mayor John
Lindsay and known formally as the "Committee to Utilize the Services of
Retired Judges", was a ten-member body established by the Chief Judge of
the State of New York to formulate recommendations as to o how retired
judges could provide further service to the Unified Court System.
{3} A "court of record" is any State-funded court specified in section
two of the Judiciary Law.