New York Senate Bill S08185

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/19/25
• Refer: 5/19/25
• Engrossed: 6/11/25
• Refer: 6/11/25
• Engrossed: 6/17/25
• Enrolled: 12/8/25
• Vetoed: 12/19/25

Caption

Prohibits persons, firms, or corporations whose interests are adverse to that of a person who received personal injuries or death as a result of an action by such person, firm or corporation from negotiating any contracts or settlements releasing such person, firm or corporation from liability for the tortious or potentially tortious act within thirty days of such act.

Summary

S08185, the “Unfair Settlement Timing Act” (USTA), would add a new section to New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules to prohibit a person, firm, or corporation whose interests are adverse to an injured person or the family of a person who died from negotiating a contract or settlement that releases them from liability for a tortious or potentially tortious act within 30 days of the incident. The bill applies to both written and oral agreements and covers situations involving personal injury or death arising from alleged wrongdoing. If a prohibited settlement or release is obtained in violation of the 30-day waiting period, it would be voidable at the option of the person giving the release. The measure takes effect immediately and is aimed at preventing early post-incident settlements that may be made before an injured person has had time to understand the extent of harm, obtain counsel, or evaluate liability.

Impact

The bill would create a new CPLR section 5003-c and impose a mandatory 30-day cooling-off period before adverse parties can negotiate settlements or releases from liability after a tortious or potentially tortious act. This would affect defendants, insurers, and their representatives in personal injury and wrongful death matters, while giving injured parties or their representatives a statutory right to void agreements made in violation of the rule. It would alter settlement practices in New York tort cases by limiting immediate post-incident resolution efforts.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill received generally favorable support, passing the Senate Judiciary Committee 16-1, the Senate floor 56-3, and the Assembly 90-45. Those margins indicate broad approval, though not unanimity, and suggest lawmakers saw the measure as a consumer-protection or fairness reform. No committee transcript is available here, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the votes indicate the bill was overall well received.

Contention

The main point of contention is the restriction on settlement freedom: opponents may view the 30-day bar as an unnecessary interference with private negotiations, especially for insurers and defendants seeking early resolution. Supporters likely argue the waiting period protects injured people and grieving families from pressure, haste, or unequal bargaining power immediately after an accident or death. The bill’s voidability remedy also raises practical questions about enforceability and whether early agreements should ever be allowed in urgent circumstances.