State Constitution Does Allow Judiciary to Fund Civil Legal Service Organizations
Just as grants on other topics legitimately go to New Yorkers via the budgets and programs of multiple state agencies, it is completely appropriate for the Judiciary to operate in a similar manner regarding civil legal services to New Yorkers in need of these services.
January 31, 2018 at 05:17 PM
3 minute read
As president of the New York State Bar Association, I laud Michael P. Friedman for his personal commitment to pro bono activities (Letter to the Editor, Jan. 29). As a New Yorker, I appreciate his concerns about the state budget. However, Mr. Friedman's conclusion that the State Constitution restricts the Judiciary from granting funds to civil legal service organizations because that is exclusively the duty of the Legislature is incorrect.
First, it is important to note that the Legislature frequently appropriates money, which is used for grants for projects across the board. These funds are appropriated to the budgets of relevant state entities or agencies, which are obligated to review grant applications and award grants. Here, such funds were placed with the Judiciary. As highlighted in the Judiciary's budget submission, “the Judiciary Civil Legal Services (JCLS) program provides funding to 80 civil legal services organizations serving low-income New Yorkers in every county of the state in matters involving the essentials of life—legal problems in the areas of housing (including evictions, foreclosures and homelessness), family matters (including domestic violence, children and family stability), access to health care and education, and subsistence income (including wages, disability, veterans and other benefits).”
Just as grants on other topics legitimately go to New Yorkers via the budgets and programs of multiple state agencies, it is completely appropriate for the Judiciary to operate in a similar manner regarding civil legal services to New Yorkers in need of these services.
Second, the Judiciary budget includes a set amount of money to be used for a specific purpose – in this case $85 million for civil legal services (plus $15 million to IOLA). By approving these appropriations in recent fiscal years, state elected officials have made a policy decision that the Judiciary would manage that money and issue grants to civil legal service providers.
In the past, the Legislature would appropriate funds for specific providers, and those organizations that had the support of legislators received money referred to as “Member Items.” To avoid potential inequality and ensure transparency in the grant process, the Association long supported having a single state entity to manage funding for civil legal services.
We now have that systematic, statewide program, managed by the Judiciary, under which grants are made and grantees are held accountable for their use of the funds. As Chief Judge Janet DiFiore noted in her remarks at the annual Justice for All luncheon during our Bar Association's annual meeting in Manhattan last week, steady management and consistent funding is having a measurable, positive impact.
More low-income New Yorkers than ever are getting legal assistance. That means more New Yorkers can stay in their homes, keep their jobs and get the services they need. And that's a win for all New Yorkers.
Sharon Stern Gerstman is president
of the New York State Bar Association.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRepealing Fault Grounds for Divorce Would Have Little Effect on NY Matrimonial Law
11 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How Law Schools Fared on California's July 2024 Bar Exam
- 2'Discordant Dots': Why Phila. Zantac Judge Rejected Bid for His Recusal
- 3Here's What Corporate Litigators Expect Del. Courts to Address in 2025
- 4U.S. Supreme Court Has No Jurisdiction Over Trump's New York Criminal Case: Prosecutors
- 5The Law Firm Disrupted: With KPMG's Proposed Entry, Arizona's Liberalized Legal Market is Getting Interesting
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250