Protect NYC's Fundamental Right to Counsel Law: Partner With Providers and Slow Down Eviction Cases
As advocates for the right to counsel and lawyers for those facing eviction, we need OCA to reduce the number of eviction cases on the court calendars to match the capacity of civil legal service providers.
May 31, 2022 at 08:03 PM
5 minute read
Imagine the impact on tenants if our city's Housing Court functioned as a place of fairness, justice and equity, and not as the eviction mill and community destabilizer that it has become.
We all know that evictions are violent events with a devastating impact on individuals' and their family's lives. Evictions force families to separate. They exacerbate mental health needs. They trigger homelessness and worsen cycles of poverty, disproportionately affecting low-income communities of color. They expose individuals to a higher rate of contact with the criminal legal system. They destroy credit scores, creating far-reaching financial consequences. And, as we have seen, evictions prove fatal in a global pandemic.
Now, after a nearly two-year hiatus, the eviction mill is grinding away even harder. Following the expiration of the eviction moratorium on Jan. 15, housing courts citywide are plowing forward. They are scheduling eviction cases every day at a rate that, in some instances, averages to four cases every thirty minutes.
In sharp contrast, when a tenant sues their landlord for repairs or harassment, they may need to wait months or longer to be heard in court. This holds true even for the most egregious circumstances, including rat infestations, mold, lead-based paint, and other emergency conditions that threaten their health and well-being.
As if this inconsistent prioritization of cases was not unfair enough, even worse, the Office of Court Administration (OCA) is intentionally scheduling eviction cases at a pace and volume that fails to match the capacity of civil legal service providers who are responsible for representing eligible tenants. This means that even where tenants have a right to a lawyer under New York City's hard-fought Right to Counsel law, they are being forced to move forward without one.
Not only do OCA's directives violate the law, but they leave thousands of low-income New Yorkers without fair and adequate representation and at risk of losing their homes. The Bronx, which is home to almost 408,000 renter households, is at the heart of this crisis as it has seen the highest proportion of eviction filings out of any borough since the moratorium's lapse.
In February, March and April alone, landlords have collectively filed roughly 8,683 total residential eviction cases in Bronx Housing Court, an overwhelming 7,757 (or 89.3%) of which are for non-payment of rent. In a system that crudely values profit over people, my clients' lived experiences navigating this court system in a pandemic have been especially heartbreaking.
Some context is necessary to understand the urgency and importance of this issue. New York's Right to Counsel (RTC) law, the first of its kind in the nation, passed in 2017 thanks to our tenacious housing justice movement. Within the first two years of the Right to Counsel's passage, evictions citywide dropped by 15% overall, and nearly 30% in ZIP codes where it was first implemented. It was championed by Bronx Borough President Vanessa Gibson and then-Council Member Mark Levine, who steadfastly partnered with their colleagues in City Council, housing advocates, tenants, organizers, attorneys and clergy leaders to ensure access to free legal representation in housing court. We are not about to stand by and see it undermined.
Speeding up evictions and slowing down repairs directly undermines the spirit and the letter of the Right to Counsel law. Moreover, after so much loss of life during this pandemic, we should be prioritizing health and housing stability, not debt collection and eviction.
As advocates for the right to counsel and lawyers for those facing eviction, we need OCA to reduce the number of eviction cases on the court calendars to match the capacity of civil legal service providers. We need OCA to issue an administrative order prioritizing only those cases where eligible tenants have retained counsel to proceed.
And we need New York City's Office of Civil Justice (OCJ), the city agency charged with implementing RTC, to work with providers and ensure that every eligible tenant in the city, regardless of ZIP code, benefits from this right. Last, we need to ensure that tenant organizers are able to lead community outreach and education efforts and receive $5 million in funding from OCJ under Local Law 53, now more than ever, to ensure that tenants attain meaningful representation in all housing court proceedings.
For New York to become the eviction-free state that every tenant deserves, we need to hold agencies like OCA and OCJ accountable for the harms they are causing those at risk of evictions and homelessness.
Actualizing the fundamental Right to Counsel means more than just implementing the law as it was written—it requires a thoughtful alignment and investment of OCA, OCJ, our city leaders, and the state legislature so that judges are not merely left to "clear the backlog" of eviction filings, but instead resolve them through a fair and equitable process. Housing is a human right. To have a home is not just about having a roof above one's head; it is about the ability to live under that roof in peace, safety and security.
Siya Hegde is an attorney and policy counsel to The Bronx Defenders' Civil Action Practice.
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 AllBinding a Successor Town Board; Default on Stipulation of Settlement: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Are New York City Housing Providers Ready for the Fair Chance for Housing Act?
10 minute readUS Supreme Court Justices Pass on Landlord Challenge to NY Rent Stabilization
2 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending 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