BILL NUMBER: S3036 Revised 02/03/25
SPONSOR: HOYLMAN-SIGAL
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the civil practice law and rules, in relation to making
technical corrections to ensure gender neutrality for the admission to
practice law and preventing any required disclosure of prior interaction
with law enforcement or the criminal justice system under certain
circumstances
 
PURPOSE:
To prohibit unnecessary and discriminatory questioning of bar appli-
cants.
 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
Sections 1, 2, 4, and 5 amend rules 9401, 9402, 9405, and 9406 of the
CPLR to make them gender neutral.
Section 3 amends rule 9404 of the CPLR to make it gender neutral and to
prohibit the questioning of applicants about interactions with law
enforcement or the criminal justice system if such interaction (i) is no
longer pending and did not result in a conviction, (ii) resulted in a
juvenile proceeding or youthful offender adjudication, or (iii) resulted
in a conviction which is now sealed.
Section 6 provides the effective date.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
New York State's application for admission to the Bar must be revised to
eliminate impermissible questions about criminal justice involvement so
that it conforms to the requirements for licensing agencies set forth in
the New York Human Rights Law and Family Court Act.
The four departments of the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme
Court, pursuant to the authority granted in C.P.L.R. 9404, use question-
naires to screen the character and fitness of applicants seeking admis-
sion to practice law in New York State. Criminal justice involvement
must be disclosed in response to several questions, including Question
26, which currently asks:
"Have you ever, either as an adult or a juvenile, been cited, ticketed,
arrested, taken into custody, charged with, indicted, convicted or tried
for, or pleaded guilty to, the commission of any felony or misdemeanor
or the violation of any law, or been the subject of any juvenile delin-
quency or youthful offender proceeding? Traffic violations that
occurred more than ten years before the filing of this application need
not be reported, except alcohol or drug-related traffic violations,
which must be reported in all cases, irrespective of when they occurred.
Do not report parking violations."
These questions are inconsistent with Section 296(16) of the New York
Human Rights Law, which provides, "It shall be an unlawful discriminato-
ry practice, unless specifically required or permitted by statute ...
for any person, ... including the state and any political subdivision
thereof ... to make any inquiry about, whether in any form of applica-
tion or otherwise, .. . any arrest or criminal accusation of such indi-
vidual not then pending against that individual which was followed by a
termination ... in favor of such individual .. . or by a youthful offen-
der adjudication ..." The bar application questions are also improper
under Section 380.1 of the New York Family Court Act which provides,
"Except where specifically required by statute, no person shall be
required to divulge information pertaining to the arrest of the (juve-
nile) respondent or any subsequent proceeding under this article."
Neither the Human Rights Law nor the Family Court Act exempts from the
prohibition against criminal record inquiries any of the administrative
agents of the New York Supreme Court who handle the licensing of attor-
neys.
Requiring disclosure of criminal justice involvement on the bar applica-
tion has an adverse impact on the representation of people of color in
New York law schools, which require disclosure on their application
forms to conform to the bar application's required disclosure. According
to recent New York State Bar Association Report, criminal record screen-
ing has a chilling effect on college and law school applicants from
communities of color due to the greater likelihood that they will be
arrested, and if arrested convicted, than their similarly-situated white
counterparts. The Report noted with concern that of the approximately
4,500 students admitted in 2021 to the 15 law schools in New York, fewer
than 400 identified as African American, Native American, Alaskan or
Pacific Islander. This disturbing under-representation of students of
color in law schools is reflected in the well-documented under-represen-
tation of people of color among lawyers admitted to practice in New
York.
The Report also noted that criminal record screening does not protect
the public from lawyers who go on to violate the ethical requirements of
the profession. The most prominent academic study of the effect of crim-
inal record screening in Connecticut on the rate of lawyer discipline
shows that such screening has no statistically-significant protective
effect for the members of the public who seek legal services. That
conclusion has not been contradicted by any data or study from the New
York Office of Court Administration.
Consistent with the findings and recommendations of the NYSBA, this bill
would conform the bar application to the requirements of current New
York law by eliminating questions that require disclosure of arrests
that are not pending at the time of application which had terminated in
the arrestee's favor, adjournments in contemplation of dismissal (which
are tantamount to dismissals), sealed convictions, juvenile delinquency
proceedings, and youthful offender adjudications. The bill will not
affect questions concerning convictions of adult offenders that have not
been sealed.
If adopted, New York would become a leader, along with California, in
eliminating over-broad and burdensome criminal record screening as a
barrier to aspiring lawyers from poor and under-represented communities.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
S.1646 of 2023-2024 (Hoylman-Sigal): Passed Senate
A.2184 of 2023-2024 (Dinowitz): Died in Judiciary
S.9292-A of 2021-2022 (Hoylman): Died in Judiciary
A.10512 of 2021-2022 (Dinowitz): Died in Judiciary
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
On the sixtieth day after it becomes law.