Relates to the imposition of penalties and remedies in suits brought for the vindication of civil rights or human rights; provides for reasonable attorney's fee and reasonable expert fees.
Summary
This bill creates a new civil rights remedies article in the New York Civil Rights Law and repeals section 24 of the Correction Law. It authorizes lawsuits against the state, its agencies, public authorities, municipal entities, and other affiliated entities when they act under color of state law and deprive a person of rights secured by the New York Constitution or state laws. The bill also gives the Supreme Court jurisdiction over these suits and guarantees a jury trial.
The measure requires courts to award reasonable attorney’s fees to prevailing parties other than the state in actions brought to enforce the new civil rights remedies section or the Human Rights Law, and it specifically includes reasonable expert fees as part of those attorney’s fees. It further states that this new article is intended to be the exclusive remedy for the covered injuries, incorporates federal civil-rights principles from 42 U.S.C. sections 1983 and 1988 where applicable, and takes effect 90 days after enactment.
Impact
The bill would significantly expand and clarify remedies available under New York law for civil rights and human rights violations by creating a dedicated state-law cause of action with fee-shifting and expert-fee recovery. It would waive sovereign immunity for the state and related public entities, abolish qualified immunity as a defense except where the bill expressly preserves it, and impose respondeat superior liability on state and municipal entities for constitutional violations by persons acting within the scope of employment. By repealing Correction Law section 24, the bill also removes a separate statutory provision related to these remedies and consolidates the framework into the new Civil Rights Law article.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears strongly supportive of civil-rights enforcement and plaintiff access to remedies, with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials. The overall tone of the proposal is expansive and remedial, emphasizing accountability for government actors and public entities. Because there is no transcript or vote history, there is no documented opposition or bipartisan split in the supplied record.
Contention
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s waiver of sovereign immunity, abolition of qualified immunity, and imposition of respondeat superior liability on the state and municipal entities, since these provisions increase exposure to lawsuits and damages-related costs. Another likely issue is the mandatory award of attorney’s fees and expert fees to prevailing parties, which could be viewed as encouraging enforcement by civil-rights plaintiffs but also as increasing litigation costs for public defendants. The bill’s designation of the new article as the exclusive remedy for covered injuries may also draw scrutiny from those concerned about preemption of existing judicial or administrative avenues.