Relates to the determination of damages in a civil action arising from personal injury or wrongful death

• Democratic1

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Nathalia Fernandez says this is needed

A discriminatory disparity exists in how civil damage awards are calcu- lated by the court system, consistently hurting women and minorities. In court calculations of lost earnings payout - say, from an injury on the job or a wrongful death - the algorithm used takes into account project- ed career earnings. Seems reasonable enough, but it often leads to discriminatory outcomes. In calculating future earnings, the algorithm takes account of factors such as "race" and "gender". These considerations, due to systemic injustices, lead to reductions in projected wages. The gender wage gap, for example, is well documented and consistently shows that women tend to make less than men for similar work. This unfortunate reality is a problem to be solved, not one that should be codified into our court systems. And the problem is widespread. According to a survey by the National Association of Forensic Economics, about one-half of economists said they consider race, while more than 90% consider gender when projecting earning potential for an injured person in a civil lawsuit resulting in inadequate damages reflective of and stemming from discriminatory prac- tices. Based on a New Jersey bill, this bill would forbid the reduction of damages due to the calculation of any factor protected in New York Human Rights Law.

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.