City Bar Applauds State Court's COVID-19 Changes—Then Suggests 10 More
The bar association detailed 10 measures that it said should be considered for "follow-up, and possible ... modification," including requiring judges to consider releasing from pretrial detention anyone above age 60 or with underlying health conditions that could increase their risk for contracting the potentially deadly virus.
March 17, 2020 at 06:52 PM
4 minute read
The New York City Bar Association on Tuesday issued a statement applauding protective measures against the coronavirus put in place in recent days by the state court system.
But at the same time, the bar association detailed 10 other measures that it said should be considered for monitoring, "follow-up, and possible … modification," including requiring judges to consider releasing from pretrial detention anyone over age 60 or with underlying health conditions that could increase their risk for contracting the potentially deadly virus.
Listing several potential measures focused on the criminal justice system, City Bar Association president Roger Juan Maldonado also said in the statement that criminal court judges "should be encouraged to reexamine bail in other appropriate cases," since the incarcerated who can't make bail "should not have to languish in jail while the City tries to contain the virus," he said.
"Their cases should be given prompt reexamination and consideration for release, with other appropriate conditions," said Maldonado.
He and the bar association also said that when arraignments happen remotely pursuant to recent state court changes, the presiding judges should consider all bail alternatives in an effort to "avoid increasing the incarcerated population to the greatest extent possible."
"Indeed, special attention should be paid to the pending crisis at Rikers Island where, according to reports, health and sanitation conditions are rapidly deteriorating," Maldonado added in the statement.
Speaking more broadly, the bar association also urged the state Unified Court System to consider having state judges "accept e-filing of all court papers, as they deem appropriate."
Many of Unified Court System's recent COVID-19-fueled changes were detailed in an "Updated Protocols" memo from Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks circulated publicly Sunday.
A spokesman for the Unified Court System on Tuesday did not address point for point the City Bar Association's lengthy statement, which also endorsed several of the state court system's recent changes.
But spokesman Lucian Chalfen did say to the Law Journal in an email, "Defense attorneys are free to make whatever applications they like to the Court. Judges will rule on those individual judicial determinations as they do in any other circumstance."
The bar association began its statement by "applaud[ing] the Unified Court System for taking steps to protect the health and safety of New Yorkers" while also urging that "special attention continue to be paid to vulnerable populations during this crisis, including individuals who are unrepresented, low-income, disabled, non-English speaking, elderly, or in poor health."
"We are pleased to see that no new civil or criminal trials will commence; that all non-essential civil matters are suspended; that all eviction and pending eviction orders are suspended; that tenants are permitted to make essential applications … that essential family court matters may proceed; and that arraignments will be conducted through video remote appearances in New York City and wherever else possible," Maldonado further said in the statement.
Still, in listing other areas that should be consider for possible follow-up or modification, the bar association also urged that a court system 800 number for emergencies and concerns should be made widely available, perhaps through the 311 system.
It also suggested, as stated exactly in its public statement:
* For incarcerated defendants, judges should consult with defense counsel prior to the court date to determine if the defendant should be produced and coordinate with corrections accordingly, or allow for telephonic appearance of the parties as appropriate. Adjournments should be shorter than 30 days where the defendant is incarcerated, unless defense counsel agree to a longer period.
* In family court cases that are deemed essential, clarify whether lawyers and litigants need to appear or if a reasonable alternative exists.
* Given that family court childcare and schools are closed, family court judges should be lenient about litigants who need to bring children into the courtroom with them or who cannot appear due to lack of childcare; and that
* Similar to evictions, all consumer debt proceedings in civil court should be suspended, and all pending consumer debt judgments should be stayed, statewide until further notice, except that a respondent's motion to vacate a judgment should be considered an essential application and heard expeditiously.
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 AllRelaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute readBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1‘Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission’: Another Consequence of 'Hobby Lobby'?
- 2With DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
- 3In-House Legal Network The L Suite Acquires Legal E-Learning Platform Luminate+
- 4In Police Shooting Case, Kavanaugh Bleeds Blue and Jackson ‘Very Very Confused’
- 5Trump RTO Mandates Won’t Disrupt Big Law Policies—But Client Expectations Might
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