As Deadline Looms, NY Judicial Salary Commission Weighs Continuation of Link to Federal Pay
Several commission members voiced concern about the expense of tying cost-of-living increases to the federal judicial compensation plan.
November 21, 2019 at 02:38 PM
5 minute read
With less than six weeks left before it is expected to release a report setting salaries for New York state judges through 2023, the Commission on Legislative, Judicial and Executive Compensation weighed whether to follow the Office of Court Administration's recommendation that they should continue to be linked to the compensation of federal judges.
Under that system, a state Supreme Court justice makes the same amount as a federal district judge, while judges in lower state courts make a set percentage of that number and judges in the Appellate Division and the Court of Appeals make proportionally more. When federal judges receive cost-of-living increases, state judges do too.
Commission chairman Michael Cardozo told commission members that he hopes some final decisions will be made at the group's next meeting, which is set for 3 p.m. Nov. 26 in the New York City Bar Association's offices in Manhattan.
"No one quite wants to commit to the federal district judge linkage, but I sense we'll get there," he said.
Several commission members voiced concern about the expense of tying cost-of-living increases to the federal judicial compensation plan.
Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks previously testified that the increases could be fully absorbed into the state court system's budget, but commission member Robert Megna said he was puzzled by that guarantee when no one knows what the economy will look like in 2023.
"We're making a four-year commitment," Megna said. "So future events could not alter what's being decided now?"
Cardozo reminded the group that they are legally required to set judicial salaries on a four-year basis, so their options in that regard are limited. Cardozo said he is aiming to get the report wrapped up fairly soon.
The commission's report carries the force of law, so it will take effect April 1, 2020, without approval from the state Legislature. The Legislature does have the option to invalidate the report, though that hasn't happened in the past.
Members were unsure how salaries and raises would be structured without the federal connection.
Commission member Seymour Lachman said he was searching for alternative ideas, especially after having lunch with a state Supreme Court justice who had reservations about the current proposal. The justice pointed out that federal judges usually have different qualifications from state judges, since they have to go through appointment and confirmation, and that their work is also different, Lachman said.
Randall Eng, a commission member and retired state judge, said he wasn't aware of any alternative plan used by the state in recent history.
"What other peg would there be in the judicial world, federal or state?" he asked.
The commission discussed a few ways to deal with the uncertainty of guaranteeing cost-of-living increases linked to federal judges' raises, including estimating the cost-of-living increases in advance to set specific numbers now or tying state salaries to the federal system for 2020 and keeping them at that level through 2023. Neither idea seemed to attract consensus.
Cardozo said guaranteed cost-of-living increases are an important recruitment tool for judges who take a pay cut to come from private practice.
State judges currently make between $189,000 and $240,800, depending on the level of their court. State Supreme Court justices, whose salary is at the heart of the plan because it's exactly the same as U.S. district court judges, earn $210,900.
In his testimony to the commission, Marks said the cost of annual raises is expected to be about $3 million, based on the past four years of federal judges' raises. He said that's less than one-eighth of 1% of the state court system's operating budget.
Some commission members said they're still interested in seeing more detailed fiscal information from the state, but Eng noted that Marks was not pulling an estimate out of his hat.
"They have a forecast," Eng said. "I take that commitment to heart, I think they are speaking authoritatively when they say [they can absorb it]."
Cardozo noted that if Chief Judge Janet DiFiore's plan to overhaul New York's complex system of lower trial courts succeeds, the next quadrennial compensation commission might be meeting during the phase-in period for major court mergers.
Since a vote on that plan won't happen until at least 2021, the current commission is still responsible for setting salaries for the lower courts' judges, he said.
READ MORE:
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
© 2024 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 AllCourt System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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