NY Prosecutorial Conduct Watchdog Could Be Placed on Hold Under Stipulation
The stipulation could be agreed to and signed in the coming days and would effectively postpone the formation of the panel until some point after state lawmakers pass a bill to change parts of the commission.
December 03, 2018 at 03:56 PM
5 minute read
The judge overseeing a lawsuit against legislation creating a special commission to investigate complaints of misconduct by the state's prosecutors is encouraging the parties involved in the litigation to enter into a stipulation that would delay the panel's creation, according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
The stipulation could be agreed to and signed in the coming days and would effectively postpone the formation of the panel until some point after state lawmakers pass a bill to change parts of the commission, which is scheduled to be created in January under the current statute.
The development means the lawsuit brought against the legislation over its constitutionality by the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York would not move forward until sometime early next year. Lawmakers are set to reconvene in Albany early next month for the start of the new legislative session.
The stipulation may also delay the bill's effective date until a specified amount of time after the Legislature approves the amendment. The parties will have to come to an agreement on that delay, whether it be a month after lawmakers approve the changes or later. That gap will give attorneys for DAASNY time to review the amended version of the legislation and decide their next steps in the litigation.
DAASNY and its president, Albany County District Attorney David Soares, brought the lawsuit in October against Gov. Andrew Cuomo and top lawmakers in the State Assembly and Senate. The group is seeking a ruling on the commission's constitutionality, which it has long argued against since the bill was first proposed in 2015.
DAASNY is represented pro bono in the litigation by Jim Walden and Jacob Gardener from Walden Macht & Haran in Manhattan.
The parties held two conference calls with Albany Supreme Court Justice David Weinstein in recent weeks to discuss a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by DAASNY in late October. Weinstein is said to have suggested that the parties instead enter into an agreed-upon stipulation rather than proceed with a decision on the motion.
There are a few moving parts that would come with entering into a stipulation, the first being timing. The schedule for the next legislative session has not been released, though lawmakers have in recent years convened for the first time on a Wednesday in early January. Lawmakers could, in theory, vote on the amendment at some point during the first few days of session.
But as of Monday, the amended version of the legislation that would establish the commission still had not been introduced in the state's bill filing system. Lawmakers have not released the exact language on what's included in the amendment, though Cuomo outlined some of the broad changes in a memo approving the bill in August.
Cuomo and state lawmakers, at the time, agreed to what's called a “chapter amendment,” which is when the governor approves a bill with a promise from the Legislature to amend it at the next earliest opportunity.
Those changes were in response to concerns raised over the bill's constitutionality by the Attorney General's Office. Leslie Dubeck, counsel to Attorney General Barbara Underwood, wrote in August that the bill would likely not survive judicial review as written. Cuomo appeared to address some, but not all, of Dubeck's concerns in his memo approving the bill.
The lawsuit from DAASNY does not consider the amendment to the legislation, though the group has said they will bring litigation regardless of those changes. Depending on the extent of the revisions, DAASNY may choose to file an amended complaint against Cuomo and state lawmakers addressing the updated version of the legislation.
The complaint, as it was filed in October, laid out the group's concerns over separation of powers issues allegedly caused by the creation of the commission, among other issues with the law's constitutionality. DAASNY has argued that instead of enacting the commission, lawmakers should work with the state's prosecutors on ways to improve the current process for disciplining attorneys.
Each Appellate Division has a Grievance Committee that addresses complaints of misconduct by attorneys, including prosecutors. Supporters of the commission have argued that those committees do not handle complaints in a transparent or expedient matter.
Daniel Sullivan, a partner at Holwell Shuster & Goldberg in Manhattan, is representing Cuomo's office in the litigation. He did not immediately return a request for comment on Monday. Spokespeople for Cuomo also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The New York Law Journal, last week, exclusively reported that Cuomo and state lawmakers had hired outside counsel for the lawsuit. The Attorney General's Office is not representing any of the defendants in the litigation at this time.
READ MORE:
Cuomo, Lawmakers Hire Outside Counsel to Defend Law Establishing Watchdog for Prosecutors
DAs File Constitutional Challenge to NY Prosecutorial Conduct Commission
Cuomo, Lawmakers Agree on Changes to Prosecutorial Misconduct Commission Bill
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 AllYou’re Sure You’ve Looked? The Use of Jackson Affidavits and Efforts to Locate Discovery Materials
Federal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Plan Suit
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Texas Asks Trump DOJ to Reject Housing Enforcement
- 2Ideas We Should Borrow: A Legislative Wishlist for NJ Trusts and Estates
- 3Canadian Private Equity Firms Are Eyeing Tech Sector
- 4Former CIA General Counsel Joining Hilton Worldwide as Legal Chief
- 5X Faces Scrutiny as EU Investigates Possible Breach of Content Moderation Standards
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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