Relates to the designation of housing judges as judicial hearing officers

BILL NUMBER:S4852

Title of bill

An act to amend the judiciary law, in relation to the designation of housing judges as judicial hearing officers

This measure is being introduced at the request of the Judiciary.

Present law limits those who may serve as a judicial hearing officer (JHO) to persons who have served for at least one year as a judge or justice of a court of the Unified Court System, other than a town or village court, and who no longer hold judicial office. Judiciary Law §850(1). This measure would expand those eligible for the JHO office to include former Housing Judges of the New York City Civil Court Housing Part.

JHOs are used by overburdened courts to expedite disposition of congested caseloads. They serve in a variety of quasi-judicial capacities in all of the State's major trial courts, where they bring to their work many years of invaluable judicial and legal experience.

Technically, Housing Judges are not Article VI constitutional judges. Rather, they are referees, appointed to function in a quasi-judicial capacity.(1) For this reason, they are not technically eligible for designation as JHOs under section 850(1) of the Judiciary Law. Nonetheless, the Legislature has long understood their office to be fully judicial in every practical respect and has acted to reinforce this view by statutorily describing Housing Judges as "duly-constituted judicial officers."(2) Accordingly, section 850(1) should be amended to reflect this understanding.

Before their appointment, prospective JHOs are rigorously evaluated by the Chief Administrative Judge to ensure that they possess the physical and mental capacity, competence, work ethic, experience and judicial temperament necessary to perform the duties of a JHO, and are well qualified to serve on the panels in the courts to which they will be designated. If deemed fit for service, JHOs are appointed for renewable one-year terms, subject to ongoing performance evaluations, assigned as necessary to panels of particular courts based upon the determination of the Chief Administrative Judge, assigned to preside over particular matters or court parts based upon a variety of factors including their previous experience and expertise, and subject to removal for unsatisfactory performance or for any conduct incompatible with service as a JHO. This evaluation process would ensure that Housing Judges seeking designation as a JHO would meet the same standards and be subject to the same accountability measures as all other JHOs.

This measure, which would have no fiscal impact on the State, would take effect immediately.

Legislative history

None. New proposal.

Footnotes

(1) See Met Council, Inc. v Crosson, 84 N.Y.2d 328 [1994].

(2) See N.Y. City Civ. Ct Act, §110 (e).