New York Assembly Bill A10877

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/8/26
• Refer: 4/8/26

Caption

Relates to eligibility of a person who is not a lawful permanent resident to be a fiduciary

Summary

A10877 amends section 707 of the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act to provide that a person who is not a lawful permanent resident is not automatically disqualified from serving as a fiduciary. In practical terms, the bill removes lawful permanent resident status as a categorical barrier to fiduciary eligibility in New York surrogate’s court matters. The measure is narrow and targeted: it does not appear to create an automatic right to serve, but instead prevents non-lawful permanent residents from being excluded solely on that basis. Other fiduciary qualifications and court oversight requirements would still apply under existing law. The bill takes effect immediately upon enactment.

Impact

The bill would amend New York’s Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act, specifically section 707, by changing the eligibility rules for fiduciaries such as executors, administrators, guardians, or other court-appointed representatives. It would eliminate automatic disqualification based solely on immigration status, thereby expanding the pool of people who may be considered for fiduciary appointments. Courts would retain discretion to evaluate candidates under the remaining statutory and case-specific requirements.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or recorded vote is available, so there is no documented debate or formal vote history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill’s text, the proposal appears to be a limited eligibility reform rather than a broad policy change, which may suggest a technical or civil-rights-oriented purpose. However, without discussion records, the overall sentiment cannot be determined beyond the bill’s introduction and referral to Judiciary.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the removal of lawful permanent resident status as an automatic disqualifier for fiduciary service. Supporters would likely view the bill as reducing unnecessary barriers and allowing courts to assess individuals on merit rather than immigration status alone. Opponents, if any, may raise concerns about fiduciary responsibility, legal accountability, or the appropriateness of allowing non-lawful permanent residents to serve in sensitive court-appointed roles. No specific objections are documented in the available materials.