Designates how certain parties may be named in a lawsuit; repealer

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Luis R. Sepúlveda says this is needed

This amendment to CPLR 1023 would require, in an action brought by or against a public official or entity, that an individual or entity shall be named by official title rather than by the name of any individual or individuals who hold the office. The amendment would repeal as unneces- sary the option in CPLR 1019 which authorizes naming the person rather than the official title. Currently an action may be brought by or against a public officer in two ways: either by naming the official title of the public office or body itself, or by naming the individual or individuals who hold the office. See CPLR 1019, 1023. When an individual named in their official capacity dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold public office, an action by or against that individual does not abate. See Abell v. Hunter, 211 A.D. 467 (2d Dept. 1924), affd, 240 N.Y. 702 (1925). But when such an event occurs, the caption no longer accurately identifies the officeholder. Although CPLR 1019 provides a procedure to update the action by permit- ting substitution of a new officeholder by name, it is inefficient to proceed by party name. First, the identity of an individual officeholder is irrelevant to obtain the relief sought because any individual who holds the public office will be bound by any judgment or settlement. Second, to ensure accuracy after a person ceases to hold office, multi- ple substitutions may be needed, e.g., once for a person with an acting or temporary appointment, pending a special election or a nomination and confirmation process; and again, for the new officeholder. Third, New York's substitution procedure was modeled on then-current federal law; but as the federal courts soon realized, the main requirements (e.g., notice to the tinnier official or showing need to continue the action) are burdensome or unnecessary. See 1961 Advisory Comm. Notes to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 25(d). Automatic substitution places unneeded burdens on court resources. This amendment would make it mandatory to name a public officer or body only by official title, rather than by the name of an individual office- holder. This method would be more expedient and avoid the problems that arise when individuals cease to hold office. See Vincent C. Alexander, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons, Laws of N.Y., Book 7B, CPLR 1023. The amendment would retain in CPLR 1023 the authority of a court to grant permission to add the names of individual officeholders. But because a person is no longer named in the first instance, a party now would have to demonstrate why adding names of individuals to an official title is necessary for an action to proceed. In rare cases where a court has authorized addition of a name, a court order would be necessary to substitute individual officeholders. See generally Matter of Travel House of Buffalo v. Grzechowiak, 31 A.D.2d 74 (4th Dep't 1968), aff d, 24 N.Y.2d 1034 (1969). The amendment would not affect actions where the official has been sued in their individual or personal capacity, i.e., actions in which the official would be personally liable for any relief independent of their official position. Instead, the other substitution provisions of the CPLR would continue to apply in such cases.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.