New York Assembly Bill A00577

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Provides that a surrogate court clerk or chief clerk shall refuse to accept for filing papers filed in a proceeding only under certain circumstances or as designated in statute, administrative rule or order of the court; provides such reasons; requires the payment of any applicable statutory fees, or an order of the court waiving payment of such fees, before accepting a paper for filing; makes related provisions.

Summary

This bill amends the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act to limit when a surrogate court clerk or chief clerk may refuse to accept papers for filing in a surrogate’s court proceeding. It specifies that refusal is permitted only in certain circumstances, including when the paper lacks a file number, uses an incomplete caption such as “et al,” is filed in the wrong court, is not properly signed, or is submitted on paper when electronic filing is required and the filing does not meet the rules for exempt or unrepresented filers. The bill also requires clerks to verify that any applicable statutory filing fees have been paid, or that a court order waiving fees has been issued, before accepting a filing. If a filing is refused, the clerk must stamp the paper with the date of refusal and provide a written explanation on the document. The measure takes effect immediately and is aimed at standardizing filing practices and making refusals more transparent.

Impact

The bill would directly affect surrogate court filing procedures under the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act by narrowing clerk discretion and codifying specific grounds for rejection of papers. It also reinforces compliance with electronic filing rules, signature requirements, captioning requirements, and fee-payment or fee-waiver procedures, affecting litigants, attorneys, clerks, and unrepresented parties in surrogate’s court matters.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented debate or recorded opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text, the measure appears procedural and administrative in nature, suggesting a generally neutral-to-supportive posture focused on clarity, consistency, and transparency in court filing practices.

Contention

No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided materials. Potential areas of concern, based on the text alone, could include the limits placed on clerk discretion, the practical burdens of electronic filing compliance, and the requirement that refusals be documented in writing, but no named stakeholders or objections are included in the record provided.