Allows for the issuance of information subpoenas on behalf of small claims judgment creditors to be effective anywhere in the state.
Summary
This bill amends several New York court acts governing small claims courts in New York City, city courts, district courts, and justice courts. Its core change is to allow clerks to issue information subpoenas for unsatisfied small claims judgments so they may be served anywhere in the state, rather than being limited by existing territorial rules. The bill also directs clerks to continue providing nominal-cost assistance to judgment creditors in preparing and using those subpoenas.
In practical terms, the measure is aimed at improving post-judgment collection for small claims litigants. A creditor who wins in small claims but cannot collect would have a broader tool to locate assets, employment, or other information about the debtor across New York State. The bill also preserves the courts’ authority to punish contempt for noncompliance with an information subpoena, reinforcing enforcement of these discovery devices.
Impact
The bill would amend section 1812 of the New York City Civil Court Act, the Uniform City Court Act, the Uniform District Court Act, and the Uniform Justice Court Act. It expands the geographic reach of information subpoenas in small claims matters to statewide service and leaves intact the existing requirement that clerks issue them at nominal cost and assist creditors. The change would primarily affect small claims judgment creditors, judgment debtors, court clerks, and courts handling enforcement of unsatisfied judgments.
Sentiment
The available materials suggest a generally favorable, practical purpose for the bill, with the caption framing it as a consumer- and creditor-assistance measure for enforcing small claims judgments. No committee transcript or recorded vote is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, opposition, or amendments. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to be a technical enforcement expansion rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the balance between helping successful small claims litigants collect judgments and increasing the burden on judgment debtors, who could be subject to statewide information subpoenas. Another possible issue is the broader reach of court enforcement power outside the local court’s traditional geographic limits. However, no specific objections, supporters, or opposing arguments are included in the provided record.
Defines the term "satisfaction" in relation to the satisfaction of judgments; allows satisfaction of judgments to be filed by affirmation rather than after notarization; increases the time during which attorneys may file satisfaction of judgment from ten to twenty years; clarifies that the twenty-day time limit applicable to filing satisfactions of judgment is measured in business days.
Defines the term "satisfaction" in relation to the satisfaction of judgments; allows satisfaction of judgments to be filed by affirmation rather than after notarization; increases the time during which attorneys may file satisfaction of judgment from ten to twenty years; clarifies that the twenty-day time limit applicable to filing satisfactions of judgment is measured in business days.