asupoena

Updates to Proofs of Service Requirements in New York State

Thu, 05 Dec 2024 19:24:31 GMT

Updates to Proofs of Service Requirements in New York State

Two bills were passed in Albany last month and signed into law in November that effect proofs of service

1. Senate Bill S7801A Requires proof of service to include the server's perception

The lawmakers' intention behind this new rule is to address civil discrimination by requiring proof of service to include the process server's perception of specific characteristics of the person to whom personal service of a summons was delivered. This measure aims to provide transparency and accountability in personal service, ensuring fairness and preventing potential discriminatory practices.

Read the full bill text here

This bill introduces changes to the language required in affidavits and affirmations submitted by process servers. Specifically, it mandates the inclusion of details about the process server's perception, using categories similar to those defined by the Federal Government, such as:

American Indian/Alaska Native
Asian
Black or African American
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
White
Middle Eastern or North African
Hispanic/Latino and Not Hispanic/Latino are included.

The rule is effective immediately, and affidavits or affirmations that fail to adhere to the updated requirements may face challenges in court.

The New York State Professional Process Servers Association (NYSPPSA) has reached out to both the Office of Court Administration (OCA) and the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) to seek clarification on how to define "race" under these categories

2. Assembly Bill A3225 Simplification of Out-of-State Affidavit Requirements

Clarifies requirements for acknowledgments, proofs, oaths and affirmations without the state

Read the full text here

History:

Previously, affidavits coming from out-of-state process servers required a certificate of conformity. This involved having the affidavit acknowledged and accompanied by a judicial officer's statement, a process that often-caused delays in getting returns from out of state.

The new law eliminates this requirement entirely, allowing affidavits to be submitted directly without additional certifications. For process servers, this means:

Faster processing of out-of-state affidavits
No need to locate an out-of-state attorney for certification
Streamlined cross-state operations

This change is expected to significantly reduce the administrative burden on process servers and improve service timelines.

How This Impacts Process Servers

These legislative changes aim to modernize and simplify the proof-of-service process.

You may see some changes on the wording of your proofs of service.

The elimination of out-of-state affidavit certifications resolves a long-standing frustration for New York process servers handling cross-jurisdictional work.

As always, staying updated on legal developments is critical.

aSubpoena and Gail, in her role of Legislative chair at NYSPPSA, will continue advocating for the profession and providing guidance as these changes are implemented.

Affirmations Added to The Toolbox Of New York State Process Servers

Wed, 10 Jul 2024 23:00:46 GMT

Bill A05772

Governor Hochul signed a new law, Bill A05772, with an effective date of January 1, 2024. The new law amended CPLR2106 and allows more flexibility and legalizes the use of affirmations in lieu of affidavits, from any person.

After several years of lobbying by the New York State Professional Process Servers Association, this law will bring New York State inline with Federal Court Practice and states like California and Florida and approximately eighteen other states. The previous version of the rule was limited to lawyers, doctors, and dentists. The new rule also changes the language on affirmation, including, the words, I affirm” the date. “ Under the penalties of perjury under the laws of New York, which may include a fine or imprisonment, that the foregoing is true, and I understand that this document may be filed in an action or proceeding in a court of law.” From the process servers’ point of view This change and flexibility in the rule will make getting proof of service back to clients much more efficient and eliminate the difficulties and cost of getting notarized affidavits back from out of state cases.

Along with NYSPPSA, the law had the support of the New York Bar Association and various New York State Jurisdictional committees.

There are still concerns whether the affirmation can be used as proof of service on all types of cases, and clarification will come with use and case law.

Breaking News: The Log Book Bill

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 23:01:38 GMT

Breaking News: The Log Book Bill

The Logbook Bill which “relates to process server records; provides for oversight of process server records by third party contractors” (NY Assembly Bill A1713 and NY Senate S01735) is sitting on the Governor’s desk to be signed.

This is a change in NY State General business law 89-cc, which means it affects only cities of one million or more people. New York City is the only city in New York State with sufficient population to fall under the requirements of Gen Business law 89-cc.

Considering ever-changing and rapidly advancing technology, use of the logbook has been considered archaic and burdensome since the changes in regulations in the city in 2011 and 2012. The NYC rules requires an entry in both the logbook and digital recording of each service and attempt of service. The reliability and uniformity of digital record is far superior to that of the written logbook and in this day just makes sense.

The language that is in the bill allows Process servers the opportunity to opt out of creating a handwritten paginated log of their service attempts and only use digital means to record the service.

------------

Sponsored in the Assembly by Assemblyman Pretlow and the in the Senate by Senator Skoufis the language reads as follows:

AN ACT to amend the general business law, in relation to process server records

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-

BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Subdivision 1 of section 89-cc of the general business law,

as added by chapter 340 of the laws of 1986, is amended to read as

follows:

1. Each process server shall maintain a legible record of all service

made by him OR HER as prescribed in this section. Such records shall be

kept, EITHER:

(A) in chronological order in a bound, paginated volume. Corrections

in records shall be made only by drawing a straight line through the

inaccurate entry and clearly printing the accurate information directly

above the inaccurate entry. All other methods of correction, including

but not limited to erasing, opaquing, obliterating, or redacting, are

prohibited[.], OR

(B) BY SUBMITTING RECORDED ENTRIES TO A THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTOR WITHIN

THREE DAYS OF SERVICE OR ATTEMPTED SERVICE, PROVIDED, HOWEVER THAT

PERMISSIONS PERTAINING TO SUCH DATA WILL BE SECURED SO THAT THE DATA

CANNOT BE DELETED UPON SUBMISSION. RECORDS SHALL BE REPORTED IN CHRONO-

LOGICAL ORDER. IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PROCESS SERVER TO TAMPER

WITH DATA OR PROPERTIES OF ANY ELECTRONIC RECORD KEPT PURSUANT TO THIS

SECTION AFTER AN IMAGE FILE IS MADE BY MODIFYING, AMENDING, DELETING,

REARRANGING OR IN ANY OTHER WAY ALTERING ANY SUCH DATA OR PROPERTIES

INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, USING A META DATA SCRUBBER OR SIMILAR

DEVICE OR PROGRAM. IF A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR HAS OCCURRED OR IF DATA

CONTAINED IN THE PROCESS SERVER'S RECORD WAS ACCIDENTALLY OMITTED FROM

EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new, matter in brackets

[ ] is old law to be omitted.

LBD00170-02-1

A. 1713--A 2

THE ELECTRONIC DATA ENTRY, THE THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTOR MAY MAKE AN AMEND-

MENT IN WHICH THE ORIGINAL RECORD SHALL BE IDENTIFIED BY ENTERING IT IN

ITALICS. ALL THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTORS MUST MAINTAIN A DAILY BACKUP OF ALL

SUBMITTED DATA, AND ALL DATA MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW UPON REQUEST

OF ANY AND ALL INTERESTED PARTIES.

§ 2. This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall

have become a law.

The Governor received the bill on April 27th, 2022 and has 10 days (not counting Sundays) to sign or veto bills passed by both houses. If the bill remains unsigned bills and not vetoed, it should become law this week . The law will take effect 30 days after it becomes law.

New York halts evictions due to corona-virus pandemic and other Court updates

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 22:55:55 GMT

New York halts evictions due to corona-virus pandemic and other Court updates

In a press release describing new “hot spot, clusters” the Governor Andrew M. Cuomo stated “….. this thing is not over.”

The NY Governor, September 29th, 2020, announced that the State’s Tenant Safe Harbor Act will be expanded until January 1st, 2021 to protect additional tenants from eviction if they are suffering financial hardship during the COVID-19 public health emergency – Executive order 202.66 .

From the governors press release, we hear that earlier this month, the State’s moratorium on COVID-related commercial evictions and foreclosures was extended by Governor Cuomo by Executive Order, until October 20th. This extends protections already in place for commercial tenants and mortgagors in recognition of the financial toll the pandemic has taken on business owners, including retail establishments and restaurants. The expectation is that commercial tenants and mortgagors would have additional time to either get back on their feet and catch up , or to renegotiate terms to avoid foreclosure moving forward.

On October 4th, In keeping with these measures, the governor, again extended the suspension and tolling of statutes until November 4th 2020 under Executive order 202.67 once again, allowing more time for cases to be served and filed.

While in the State Courts, new Administrative orders have been issued.

Deputy Chief Administrative Judge for the New York City Courts George J. Silver today announced that as of Monday, October 5th, 2020, the New York City courts will adopt a uniform case scheduling order in all civil cases where the City of New York is named as a defendant. This will eliminate the need for in-person conferencing, allowing clerks to enter dates for discovery disclosures.

In the Housing Courts E-filing has been adopted for eviction cases in all five borough of New York. Filers may now e-file all landlord and tenant matters in the Bronx, Harlem Community Justice Center, Kings, New York, Queens & Richmond County Civil – Housing Parts.

New York City Rule changes, Simplify or Shifty

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 22:53:43 GMT

New York City Rule changes, Simplify or Shifty

Things are going on in the City of New York that will affect the service of process Nationwide.

Facts:

New York City is the biggest and most litigious city in the country.
New York City is the most regulated city when it comes to service of process.
Process servers in the city of New York are fined more often than any other city in the nation.
New York City receives more cases to serve both nationally and internationally than any other city in the nation. Millions of papers are received and served in the City’s five boroughs.
Due to punitive fines, there is a continued decline in licensed process servers working in New York City and service in the City is harder to obtain and more expensive.

Some History

Annual audits on at least 20% of licensed process servers serving papers for the Housing court were mandated by the City Council in a political response to articles written in the New York Times “Unsheltered” which discussed the housing crisis and unfair treatment of tenants by landlords and attorneys. Described as the Lawsuit Mills the article went on to say ”because few lawyers are ever sanctioned the system creates an incentive to file as many cases as possible”. To be fair, there were abuses listed by the article against unlicensed servers or people pretending to be licensed servers.

At that hearing there was:

Evidence presented by Casey Adams, at the time he was deputy director City Legislative Affairs, NYC Consumer Affairs (DCA) indicated that audits previously run on process servers and fines imposed were for record keeping infractions.
Evidence presented by NYSPPSA showed that improper service was not being committed by licensed process servers, but rather by unregulated servers and landlords and as indicated by the Times articles instances of fraud or bad service were acted upon by the systems already in place.
The facts showed and the DCA agreed that there were very NO instances of traverse hearings which showed improper service, or decisions against licensed servers in Housing Court.
NYSPPSA suggested in writing, which was later implemented by the city, that notice be given to tenants in Spanish and English that the demand letters were the start of litigation and that they could seek attorney assistance through advocate agencies.

In spite of all the above, the city needed a scapegoat so, instead of fining landlords or attorneys for their bad practices, they chose to fine process servers for doing their jobs properly. Hard to grasp the logic.

The result: The DCWP (formerly DCA) started auditing process servers and this is what they found:

Few instances of improper service but minor recordkeeping errors, like a missing or incorrect ZIP Code or writing “cap” instead of a hair color when the hair color of the recipient was covered.
We’ve seen fines from $1500-$25000 because of these audits. FEW of them with improper service. But when you can accrue a fine of $750-$1000 for any single missing ZIP Code or typo it’s easy to rack up the big numbers.
The result of course is hours and hours of time spent negotiating with a DCWP/DCA to try to get fines reduced.
The most disturbing result was that good servers, who can’t afford attorneys, are leaving the industry because ”it’s just not worth it anymore”.

The Present: What is happening now

Many of you already know that a bill was passed in New York State changing the General Business Law. This rule change offers options for record keeping. Servers may handwrite a logbook to keep track of their service and use digital record keeping or only use the digital record that is mandated by the city rules established in 2011 and 2012.
The former Dept. of Consumer affairs (DCA) has changed its name to New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP). On July 13, 2022, DCWP announced by email, a proposal of rule change. Rule Full Text
The purpose in proposing the rule change is cited “to implement the amended General Business Law and streamline Process server and Process Server agency requirements for the content, storage, retention, and production of records and electronic record“ by repealing the previous rules

So what about these rules changes, are they simply to implement the amended general business law, or are they something else?

This is a 22 Page document filled with:

Definitions
Mandated fields of information
Mandated ways to input information
Mandated requirements of what the information needs to hold
Open ended time periods for audits
Mandated fines starting at $ 750 per infraction

It starts with 2-231- 2 Definitions.

The comments have been that these lack clarity and show a lack of understanding of NY State Law and set aside New York State Case Law Precedent.

To name just a few that have been cited:

Personal service is confused with personal delivery in the NYC version.
Attempts to define Agency Service CPLR 308.3, which is a rarely used statute. NYC would require research on the part of the server to be able to identify who is actually an agent (which is not the server’s job). Additionally, NYC seeks to mandate that name and titles which are routinely refused are required. How do process servers who have no power to demand information, deal with this common issue?
Mixes up the CPLR with the RPAPL in substituted and conspicuous service rules.
Applies the term “chronological” which was meant to be applied to the handwritten logbook, to the uploading of digital records. This would result in delayed workflow and forcing process servers to remain in possibly dangerous and combative situations by requiring them to remain at locations after the services are completed.

It goes on to section 2-233 Records –

DCWP fines for recordkeeping errors so we question the mandates in this section to name just a few ie:

VII. The Name of the recipient must be entered last name, first name, will a fine be issued if you only get an initial for the last name. Will Jane or John Doe no longer be acceptable?
IX. The time must be entered in Military time (who thinks in military time???)
XIII. Mandates the full index number be entered as XXXXX/XX – with 62 counties in our state and various District Courts, Town Courts, Justice Courts etc., all of which have their own method of formatting index numbers, this is IMPOSSIBLE to comply with.
Additionally mandated in this section is that even if the court or attorney has not put a prefix on a document, the server has to figure out what the appropriate prefix is and enter it. The information in a caption is provided by an attorney or a court. Process servers are not attorneys and have no authority to do this. NYC could instead mandate that the index number on the document be put in the record.
XVI. Again Mixes conspicuous service from the RPAPL735 which asks for a description of the door, with requirement CPLR 308.4.This mandate requires not only a description of the Door and adjacent area, but the position of the door in relation to steps and elevators and doorstep, color and composition of walls and floors. (Wouldn’t it be better to require GPS photo of the posting on the door)
XVII. Requires that if the process server serves under RPAPL via suitable age or conspicuous service, the server must input the registered or certified mail receipt no. Since there is no rule that the process server does the mailing and they have to be done on a strict 24hour time frame, many agencies or attorneys do the mailings. It makes no logical sense that the server be responsible to input this information at the time of service. The server would not even have the number at this point even if he/she was doing the mailings. This is an illogical requirement.
XVIII Requires that if an affidavit is filed with the court the server must input the file date in the record. We see no reason for this being mandated because servers seldom file affidavits especially with new e-filing rules.

Just a side note: Some of this may require serious updates and adjustments by the third party so that the process server can comply, as he/she obviously cannot enter something that is not programed to present in the way the DCWP is demanding, or in the additional manner which the documents must be able to be retrieved.

Another change that is being questioned comes under D (2) Integrity of Record:

This starts out with maintenance by the third-party provider to provide tamper proof records, but ends with how to deal with a typographical error. Only the process server who attempted or effected the process may request that a third-party contractor make an amendment to a record of service.

First: this conflicts with the mandates above in XVII and XVIII since how can a server input information that is acted upon after the date of service if he cannot even make a change in the record.

Second: With few third-party providers serving the industry, how will they efficiently deal with multiple server and minor typographical errors??? This is troublesome on many accounts:

Additional errors caused by misunderstanding
Delays in being able to create Affidavits
Privacy Policies in place with 3rd parties
Liability issues for the 3rd party

2-235 Preparation of Affidavits: goes hand in hand with the above

The section reads: No licensee [shall] may sign or notarize or cause to be signed or notarized an affidavit of service until all factual averments have been set forth. The licensee must not make a false statement in an affidavit of service. Again, we question why this has been added, especially since, by their own admission, and despite great scrutiny, very little improper service has ever been found.
An affidavit by its very nature has been held to be Prima Facie evidence that service has been effectuated. It is sworn to under penalty of perjury by the act of being notarized.
Is the new language going to be used to malign honest mistakes, that have no bad intent?
Is DCWP saying that a typo on an Affidavit is a false statement and can be fined?
Would an amended affidavit of service be considered a false statement?

Mistakes happen and affidavits are often amended to change a typo or add information that an attorney wants to present in court. What are the long term effects that this policy would have on an attorney’s case? Could it cause a defect in service?

One of the most controversial changes has to do with section 2-240 Audits:

Any responsible person working in a field where integrity is the key ingredient, can appreciate a system of checks and balances. However, the DWCP is supposed to be regulating against improper service and protecting the public while doing so. After two years, found problems have come in the form record keeping issues, NOT improper service.

Section A :

Eliminates the 2-month cap on the period of time that can be audited

This elimination is very troublesome. This leaves open for a much larger range of records to be reviewed and puts a terrible burden on the person under audit, which will result in a loss of revenue and frankly the loss of process servers who will just give up in face of this burden. This is a process server shortage waiting to happen.

Then we get to Section 12, the most egregious section, which deals with the penalty schedule.

The DCWP puts in writing the fines one can be expected to pay. Seeing this presented in writing is intimidating, to say the very least. It prices each violation (typo, transposed zip code, or any other basic record keeping errors – this is each error so, transpose on three defendants at the address and get fined $2100 or more):

1st violation $750

2nd violation $900

3rd and subsequent violation $ 1,00

Despite the fact that Process servers are mandated by law to protect due process.
Despite the fact that they are out in the field serving the community in all types of weather through COVID, facing irate consumers who are more likely to push them down the stairs than thank them.
Despite the fact that the 8th amendment of the Constitution reads that Excessive bail shall not be required, no excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.
Despite the fact that these errors are human error, without malice or intent to defraud.
Despite the fact that we have argued and reached out to the DCWP and the City Council to reconsider the amount of the fines to be more in keeping with the errors and not so punitive.
Despite the fact that the fines represent a substantial portion of the income earned.
Despite the fact that The DCWP knows these fines are causing people to leave the industry.
Despite the fact that no improper service is found.
Despite the fact that this intimidation of process servers is causing more unregulated process to occur in the city.

What the City and the DCWP is doing unquestionably is excessively fining an industry for record keeping infractions, which have no relation to the value of the error and destroying businesses and lives. These fines are so intimidating that process servers and agencies will not publicly speak out about this, in fear of being audited and fined huge, punishing fines, for making human errors in record keeping. The DCWP renamed itself the Department of Consumer and Workers Protection. Do you see them protecting the workers in the Process Server industry?

So do you believe the purpose set forth in the proposal or do you believe something else is going on here?

What happens to all those papers coming into the city to be served when there is no one left who knows how to do the job?
What happens to when no one is left who understands the rules of service?
What happens to when no one is left to serve with integrity?
What happens when no one is left to protect the consumers rights to due process?

Effective starting April 7th, 2022 The Consumer Credit Fairness Act

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 22:40:54 GMT

Effective starting April 7th, 2022 The Consumer Credit Fairness Act

Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law the Consumer Credit Fairness Act last year, which goes into effect April 7th, 2022.

This legislation addresses the transparency of these cases by ensuring that the original debtor of the collection case is named, and that the time from when the debt initiated to when it goes to court is more reasonable. It tries to ensure that the plaintiff has a valid address for service and closes some of the loopholes that exist in the law which make it difficult for consumers to defend against these types of cases. It also sets forth additional procedures to be used by debt collectors when calling consumers and provides consumers with information on how to defend against such a lawsuit.

Within these new rules there are serious changes to The NY Civil Practice and Laws and Rules (CPLR) governing collection and service of consumer debt papers and lawsuits that are filed by 3rd party debt collectors in New York State.

Two major changes go into effect April 7th2022

The statute of limitation for most debt collection actions changes from six years to three years. This will limit or prohibit attorneys from collection on older consumer debt transactions and this provision will apply retroactively to all consumer credit transactions.
A payment toward a debt or a “written or oral affirmation of ownership of the debt will no longer allow a debt collector to extend the statute of limitations as it has hereto fore.

Additional changes go into effect regard filing and notice requirements on May 7th, 2022 including:

Changes to the Complaint:

A copy of the original contract or credit agreement and charge off notice must be attached to the complaint when initiating the action
The complaint must disclose the name of the original creditor, the last four digits of the account in question and the date and amount of the last payment.

Changes to the filing proof of service

When filing the affidavit of service in a consumer debt case, the notice to the consumer has been amended. It is called an “Additional Notice of Lawsuit” this will get filed together with a postage-paid unsealed envelope addressed to the defendant. It will be submitted to the clerk of the court, at the same time as the proof of service, and the clerk will mail it to the to the consumer. The additional notice must be in English and Spanish. It explains to the consumer the consequences of the lawsuit and that they need to respond to the lawsuit.
If the notice is returned by the United State Postal Service to the court clerk as undeliverable the court clerk will not accept an application for a default judgment.

Changes to the Motion for Default Judgement

When filing a motion for summary judgment the plaintiff must submit to the court clerk an additional notice document marked “Important Notice” in English and Spanish together with a postage-paid unsealed envelope addressed to the defendant. The court clerk will then mail this notice to the consumer. This “Additional Notices” goes into detail explaining that a Motion for Judgement in the case was filed and advisees the respondent how to respond to the motion.
When applying application for a default judgment, if the debt collector is not the original creditor, the 3rd party debt collector must submit supporting affidavits from the original creditor, prior assignors or sellers of the debt, and a witness for the collector who can verify the chain of title for the debt.
Upon application for a default judgment, the plaintiff must also include an affidavit stating that after reasonable inquiry, has not expired.

Objections and Defense

If a consumer raises the defense of improper service in his answer, he/she, will not be time barred if he does not file a motion to dismiss within 60days after serving the answer.

2021-2022 Legislative session bill https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/a2382

New York Evictions 2022

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 22:36:17 GMT

New York Evictions 2022

The ending of the Covid Moratorium on Eviction means the legal process for evictions has started again for thousands of New Yorkers.

With the Courts leaning toward protecting the tenants, the eviction process has become much more complex.

Due to mismanagement or improper service many cases have been delayed or thrown out. The reasons for these issues are explained by the shifting legal landscape and the attitude of the times.

The Digital Transformation of the Court System

The COVID-19 pandemic essentially brought the Court system to a stop. Physical presence at courts were suspended and are still restricted in many cases. Technology, digitization, and AI tools became the only way forward. In the new normal, many courts are relying on virtual hearings and e-filing.

The Not Unified Court System

Each county, town or city has their own procedure and their own rules regarding the eviction process. It is important that these rules are followed to move your case forward. Different locals are using different technology and methods to initiate and file cases. The courts have been restricting or allowing entry to their court, with some courts requesting appointments to visit as conditions change to protect their local communities. This causes the availability of access to the courts to constantly change.

New Rights for Tenants

In response to the housing crisis state and city legislators effectuated new rules governing eviction. These rules went into effect in 2019, before the pandemic. They strengthened the protection for tenants, increased the time to respond to termination notices and added notices to the tenant looking for legal advice.

Keeping up with and navigating through these evolving changes has become convoluted.

aSubpoena Service, LLC stays in front of these issues to make this less stressful for our clients.

Our professional team is up to date on legal technology to get your cases served and filed.

Our reliable field staff are in communication with the local courts, in the jurisdictions that we serve, and keep us abreast of the changes within the courts as they evolve.

Our knowledgeable team is cognizant of landlord tenant law and fully informed in how to apply the rules and best practices to complete and uphold your service of process.

Let aSubpoena serve your eviction cases in Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, and Orange counties.

EVICTION FAQS

How does a landlord evict a tenant in New York State?

A landlord can evict a tenant for any number of reasons. However, before the eviction can occur the landlord must first give notice.

This starts with the landlord serving the tenant a written Notice, as required by state law.

If the tenant does not comply with the notice the landlord can then file an eviction lawsuit with the court: generally, a Notice of Petition and Petition.

What are the common causes of and types of Evictions?

There are two basic types of eviction proceedings.

Non-payment Procedure:

A Non-Payment case is brought when the landlord is seeking to evict the tenant based on the tenant’s failure to pay rent.

Holdover Procedure:

A holdover case is a proceeding to evict a tenant on any grounds other than the nonpayment of rent.

How do you start a Non-payment Proceeding?

A Nonpayment eviction is started when the tenant is late with his rent and starts with a Written Rent demand or notice.

According to new state law, the Landlord/Owner/Attorney must send a notice by certified mail stating that the rent is overdue when it is at least 5 days past the due date.

The 14-Day Notice essentially demands that the tenant pay all the back rent in full within 14 days or move out. It lets the tenant know that if he/she does not pay you will evict him. This notice is served on the tenant.

What is a Holdover Proceeding?

A Holdover case is brought to evict a tenant or a person in the residence who is not a tenant for reasons other than simple nonpayment of rent.

Some examples would be in an instance where:

A tenant has violated one of the terms of the written lease; behaves illegally, is subletting illegally or is a nuisance.
A tenant’s lease has expired or been terminated, but the tenants refuse to leave.
A person “licensee” who was never a rent paying tenant i.e., a family member who has overstayed his welcome, or a squatter” who never had permission to be at the residence.

How do you start a Holdover Eviction?

To start the Holdover proceeding the landlord must first serve a tenant with written notice that his/her actions are in violation of the lease and provide the tenant with time to cure.

Generally, the Notices in a Holdover that gets served are either:

Notice to Cure: This notice will give the tenant a set time to rectify the situation.

Notice to vacate: This notice must contain a date by which the tenant must vacate.

It’s important to note that the type and length of the notice depends on many factors. It can range from several days to 90 days depending on the circumstance.

What does service of the Notice mean?

The initiating Notices in a Landlord tenant case must be delivered to the tenant by a person not related to the case or a professional process server.

It is better to use a professional process server like aSubpoena because we know the rules that apply to landlord tenant cases, and the best practices to use to ensure that the service of these documents can be upheld in court.

What happens if the tenant ignores the Initial Notices?

If the tenant fails to vacate or fails to cure after the expiration of the notice the landlord or attorney will commence an action in court. New documents called a Notice of Petition and Petition are prepared and delivered to the tenant calling for him/her to answer to the court.

How do you Serve the Notice of Petition and Petition?

The Notice of Petition and Petition documents are served on the tenant at the house/apartment by a person not related to the case or a professional process server like aSubpoena.

The papers must be served no more than 17 days nor less than 10 days before the hearing date.

The Documents may need to be mailed by first class and certified mail within 24 hours of the service depending on who is served.

An affidavit, or proof of service is prepared giving the details of the service; then is filed in the court with the appropriate attachments as proscribed by the court.

You need a team on your side that moves fast and is reliable to get your cases served, comply with the rules of service, and watch the complex timing of these cases.

aSubpoena Service LLC has the experience and know how to serve and file your eviction papers in Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, and Orange counties.

Simplify your life by using aSubpoena for Serving and Filing.

ASubpoena and its employees are not Attorneys and do not provide legal advice .

Breaking News: The Clock Restarted in New York on Court Cases

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 22:23:25 GMT

Breaking News: The Clock Restarted in New York on Court Cases

While votes were being counted last nights, Governor Cuomo issued another Executive Order that ENDS effective today- November 4th, 2020, the Tolling of Time limits in filings, service and court actions in New York State.

This latest Executive Order 202.72. means that the clock picks up where it stopped on March 7th or starts today on any cases in work or commenced before November 4th,2020.

For example, if a case was filed before the suspension in March and had 90 days left to be served, you still have that same 90days to serve that case, starting from Nov 4th, 2020. Alternatively, if you started a case anytime within the toll period from March 7th until Nov 4th, 2020 you still have the full number of days (i.e. Supreme/civil 120days) to serve your case starting today.

This is a hopeful sign that that the Governor is confident in New York and New Yorkers, despite fears of an uptick in Covid-19 cases surrounding the state.

Breaking News: E-filing Commences for Non Essential Matters

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 22:02:00 GMT

Breaking News: E-filing Commences for Non Essential Matters

Today, Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks issued an Administrative Order implementing the memorandum which permits the filing of new non-essential matters through NYSCEF even in counties that have not yet reopened.

Commencement of new matters are now allowed in all counties per order AO-114-20 . The dates we can start e-filing range from May 18th to May 26th in courts, and case types approved for electronic filing. Represented parties must commence new matters, or proceed in pending matters, exclusively by electronic filing through NYSCEF.

This memorandum does not address the Lower Courts.

It is important to note: The Governor has not eased the restrictions on commerce imposed due to the COVID-19 health emergency in all regions. However, this does to a large extent bring the Legal System in NY to a point where new cases can be brought to court.

Counties Effective Date by Region to E-FIle New Cases

May 18, 2020
Finger Lakes: Orleans, Monroe, Wayne, Genesee, Wyoming, Livingston, Ontario, Yates, and Seneca.
Mohawk Valley: Herkimer, Oneida, Otsego, Fulton, Montgomery, and Schoharie.
Southern Tier: Steuben, Schuyler, Chemung, Tompkins, Tioga, Broome, Chenango, and Delaware.
May 20, 2020
Western New York: Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie, and Niagara.
May 21, 2020
North Country: Clinton, Franklin, St. Lawrence, Jefferson, Lewis, Hamilton, and Essex. Central New York: Oswego, Cayuga, Cortland, Onondaga, and Madison.
May 25,2020
Mid-Hudson: Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester New York City: New York, Bronx, Queens, Kings, and Richmond. Long Island: Nassau and Suffolk.
May 26, 2020
Capital Region: Albany, Columbia, Greene, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady, Warren, and Washington.

Executive Order Extends Tolling

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:57:33 GMT

Executive Order Extends Tolling

On May 7th, 2020 Governor Cuomo issued a new Executive Order 202.28 which extended the provisions tolling statutes to June 6, 2020. Documents and statutes that would have expired are still viable through this date. We expect that until the courts reopen, these dates will continue to be extended.This same order extends the eviction moratorium on renters until August 20th, 2020, giving an additional 60 days of rent reprieve to unemployed residents, and businesses suffering from the COVID-19 shutdown.

E-FILING NEWS

As of Monday May 4th, 2020 all courts that normally accept E-Filed affidavits are now accepting them again.*Please note: this is only for pending cases

A note regarding Domestication of Subpoenas and Criminal Cases: NY, NJ

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:38:03 GMT

A note regarding Domestication of Subpoenas and Criminal Cases: NY, NJ

The Uniform Interstate Deposition and Discovery Act has been effective in its purpose to streamline the rules governing foreign depositions, “setting forth a Procedure that can be easily and efficiently followed, that has a minimum of Judicial oversight and intervention, that is cost effective for the litigants and is fair to the deponents.”*

This act has come in handy throughout the country, as the amount of litigation involving individuals and documents located outside of the trial state has increased, there has also been an increase in Domesticating Interstate Subpoenas, especially in Civil Actions. Thirty-one states have adopted rules to comply with this act including, as we have mentioned before, New York and more recently New Jersey

However, compelling a witness to give testimony or produce records in a Criminal Case is not covered under 2012’s NY CPLR 3119 The NY State CPLR obviously deals with Civil Practice Laws and Rules. The same is true with New Jersey’s Rule 4:11-4(B) which again applies only to Superior Court.
In Criminal cases in these states the basic procedure would be to:

Review and comply with the requirements of the forum jurisdiction to pursue discovery in another jurisdiction.
Obtain a Commission or Letters Rogatory under the seal of the appropriate court clerk or public official authorized in the forum jurisdiction to issue such a document.
You may want to include 1) the crimes charged, (2) the penalties if the defendant is convicted, (3) the facts in the police report relied upon by the prosecution, (4) an offer of proof as to the expected testimony of the out-of-state witness, (5) the evidence law of the requesting state that makes the witness’s testimony relevant, (6) the materiality of the witness’s testimony, (7) the necessity of the witness’s testimony, (8) the witness’s address, (9) the fact that each state has adopted the Uniform Act, (10) the date the hearing to scheduled to begin, (11) If a witness is required, the dates when the witness will be needed to testify, and (12) an accounting of the travel funds required.
Retain an attorney authorized to practice in the foreign State to petition the appropriate Court in the foreign State for an order authorizing the issuance of a subpoena commanding the resident to answer written interrogatories or to appear at and submit to a deposition or produce the record required.
Upon receipt of the signed order and subpoena, have the subpoena or notice in lieu of subpoena served in the foreign state.

Obviously these are just the basics each jurisdiction may have different requirements so it is always good practice to check with the foreign court that rules procedure or make sure your local counsel is familiar with these procedures.

* National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State laws

J Gary Pretlow Introduces a bill to help Process Servers In NYC

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:29:01 GMT

J Gary Pretlow Introduces a bill to help Process Servers In NYC

Late in February Larry Yellon and Gail Kagan and Rob Gillis representing the New York State Association of Professional Process Servers, made a presentation to Assemblyman, J Gary Pretlow. We explained an ongoing problem Process servers are having regarding rule 89B of the NY State General Business law. Rule 89 which only effects cities with populations of over a million people, in part requires that process servers keep a handwritten log of every service made within the City limits. However, in recent years the NY City Council introduced legislation requiring all city process servers to keep digital records making the hand written log portion of the business law outmoded. Our servers have been over taxed by this duplicate record keeping often spending hours copying their digital records over by hand to satisfy this requirement.
In response to our conversation, Mr. Pretlow introduced a new bill A05656 into the Assembly outlined below.

TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the general business law, in relation
to process server records

PURPOSE OF BILL:

To eliminate the mandated redundancy and duplication of efforts in
record keeping by a process server that has incurred since the
inception of NYC municipal laws that now mandate a digital record
requirement.

SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:

Section 1. To amend 89-bb of the general business law adding a new
subdivision 3 to read A “third party contractor” is an independent
third party who provides services and perform functions described in
subdivision one of sec.89-cc for the purpose of meeting the data
storage retrieval requirements.

Section 2. Subdivision 1 of sec. 89-cc of the general business law,
added by chapter 340 of the laws of 1986. Each process server shall
maintain a legible record of all service made by him as prescribed in
this section.

Section 3. Effective Date

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

New Bill

JUSTIFICATION:

In order to create a more efficient way for the regulators to review
the records of process servers, municipalities that have one million
or more people (NYC) have implemented a mandatory digital record
requirement that mirrors the State requirement of General business law
Sec. 89-cc. Requiring the process server to record the same
information twice, a handwritten format and a digital format. The
result of that law has created an undue burden for the process server.
This burden does not provide any benefit to the citizens of New York
nor any regulatory authority. This law will allow the process server
an option to meet the requirement of sec. 89-cc that mirrors the
requirement of the local Municipality. The process server will be able
to streamline their data recording in a tamper proof environment that
will create more transparency and reduce the risk of fraud.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall have
become law.

NYSPPSA 10th Annual Conference

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:23:27 GMT

NYSPPSA 10th Annual Conference

This past weekend October 10th and 11th, 2014 members of the New York State Professional Process Servers Association (NYSPPSA) headed to Tarrytown, New York for the 10th Annual Convention. In a landmark year including a lawsuit against the Department of Consumer Affairs, overcoming challenges with licensing renewal, and working toward making assault on a process server a felony, the association had a lot to cover this year.

I was happy to report as Publicity Chair that NYPSSA received coverage in several major articles in both televised and in print, including, Crain’s NY, The NY Law Journal, The NY Times , City and State Magazine, The Legislative Gazette and NY Now On PBS.

Speakers this year were Tracey Harkins, regarding the status of the pending Federal Lawsuit Appeal filed on behalf of NYSPPSA and Myra Sensor regarding the most recent developments in the NYC DCA treatment regarding Process servers. Fred Blum spoke to us regarding Skip Tracing. We were honored than NY State Assemblyman J. Gary Pretlow stopped by and promised us future meetings to discuss our issues.
Election Results

President: Larry Yellon
1st Vice President: Jillina Kwiatkowski
2nd Vice President: Gail Kagan
Secretary: Kim Letus
Board Member: Erin Burruto
Board Member: Ellen Eakley
Board Member: Dan Clothier
Board Member: Bernard Hughes

This Board will be looking forward to a busy year. We will continue to work toward making assault on a process server a felony throughout the state. And we are hoping to address legislation to reduce the redundancy in the NYC Log book rule. Currently process servers working within the 5 Boroughs are required not only to log attempts with a third party software program but also keep record in a physical log book as well. We will be meeting with our NY State Senators and NY State Assemblymen and City legislature as we continue to work towards a better and stronger process serving community.

The State of New Jersey simplifies the procedure to convert and domesticate a foreign state’s subpoena

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:17:15 GMT

The State of New Jersey simplifies the procedure to convert and domesticate a foreign state’s subpoena

As of September 1, 2014, The New Jersey Supreme Court has amended Rule 4:11-4 to provide a new section, R. 4:11-4(b), incorporating the concept of the UIDDA, simplifying the procedure for issuing foreign deposition subpoenas consistent with the Uniform Interstate Deposition and Discovery Act (UIDDA).

The Uniform Law Commission, formerly the National Council of Commissioners on Uniforms State Laws promulgated the UIDDA in 2007. The Act sets forth an efficient and inexpensive procedure for civil litigants to depose out-of-state individuals and for the production of discoverable materials that may be located out-of-state. 31 states have adopted the UIDDA, some verbatim, others with variations in their wording.

Under the new law, litigants present to a clerk of the court located in the state and county where discoverable materials are sought with a subpoena issued by a court in the trial state. Once the clerk receives the foreign subpoena, the clerk will sign a domesticated subpoena for service upon the person or entity on which the original subpoena is directed. The terms of the issued subpoena must incorporate the same terms as the original subpoena and contain the contact information for all counsel of record and any party not represented by counsel.

The Act requires minimal judicial oversight and eliminates the need for obtaining a commission or local counsel in the discovery state, letters rogatory, or the filing of a miscellaneous action during the discovery phase of litigation. Discovery authorized by the subpoena is to comply with the rules of state in which it occurs. Furthermore, motions to quash, enforce, or modify a subpoena issued pursuant to the Act shall be brought in and governed by the rules the discovery state.

New Jersey R. 4:11-4(b) incorporates this concept and provides, additionally, that not only the clerk of Superior Court in the county where the discovery is to take place may issue the foreign subpoena. Thus, an out-of-state litigant has two choices; file the request(s) with the clerk of court in the appropriate county, and pay filing fees, or have a New Jersey attorney prepare and issue the subpoena(s). Service of subpoenas, in either case, would be arranged through local process servers.

NY E-Filing …. New York State Court E- Filing

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:14:50 GMT

NY E-Filing …. New York State Court E- Filing

The New York State Courts Electronic Filing System (“NYSCEF”) is a means of filing and serving legal documents electronically with various courts, including the Surrogate’s Court, Supreme Court and the Court of Claims. The system is accessible through a website located at this address: www.nycourts.gov/efile

Legislation was enacted in 2011 allowing electronic filing of litigation through the NY State Courts Electronic filing system (NYSCEF). In 2012 pursuant to an administrative order, Electronic filing, E-filing is mandatory in all commercial contract and tort actions, without regard to the amount in controversy , that are commenced in NY County Supreme Courts. ( a breakdown of Mandatory NY E-Filing is listed below)

New, New York State E-filed case can be commenced electronically by an attorney, paralegal or agent authorized by the attorney to e-file on his behalf.

The NY E-File system provides immediate e-mail notice of all filings, including filing of all orders, judgments, and decisions, which will be available on-line. Fees can be paid on-line with a credit or bank card bearing a MasterCard or Visa logo.

Questions regarding this system can be answered on line, on the State of New York e-file website listed above or you can call us at Action Subpoena, Inc. to answer your questions or do your e-filing.

New Forms for Request of Judicial Intervention (RJI) for NY State

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:05:57 GMT

New Forms for Request of Judicial Intervention (RJI) for NY State

On July 20 2012, new RJI forms were issued.

Notice: The Unified Court System has issued a new RJI (UCS-840) and has added addendums which must be included with the RJI for Commercial Division, Foreclosure and Matrimonial cases.

The clerk’s offices, throughout the state will be rejecting the old forms in a very short time. The forms can be obtained on line under the google search UCS-840.

Governor Andrew M Cuomo vetoes legislation detrimental to Process Servers

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 21:02:16 GMT

Governor Andrew M Cuomo vetoes legislation detrimental to Process Servers

Service of Process on the Secretary of State (S.5533 Bonacic/ A.8455 Weinstein)

This legislation would allow any Department of State office in New York State to accept service of process on the Secretary of State. Under current law, service upon the Secretary of State must be done in the Albany office. If enacted, this bill would have a detrimental impact on local businesses hired by law firms and municipal governments from around New York State to serve process on the Secretary of State’s Albany office. This bill passed both Houses in March.

NYPPSA and NAPPS both sent letters in opposition to this legislation and we were heard.
On August 1, 2012, Governor Andrew M Cuomo vetoed both versions of the proposed law, putting to rest, at least temporarily an issue that would have had severe detrimental effects to our members in the Capital region of New York State.

New Information from NYPPSA in the ongoing Negotiations with NYC DCA

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 20:57:42 GMT

New Information from NYPPSA in the ongoing Negotiations with NYC DCA

This expert has been sent out by thew NYPPSA Administration:

To All Members:
On May 12 2011 the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs, heretofore referred to as the DCA published amendments to the current rules regarding Digital Record Keeping for Licensed Process Servers and Agencies. The hearing for the amendments will take place on June 13th 2011. Concurrently, they also published the rules on the GPS requirements for Licensed Process Servers. The hearing for those rules will also be on June 13th 2011. The purpose of these amendments is to simplify and clarify the record keeping requirements of the previously adopted rules.
The amendments address many but not all of our objections to the Digital Record Keeping. The areas addressed are as follows:

The Process Server and Agency only has to keep the file date of the Affidavit IF they physically filed it.
The Process Server will only have to keep the certified rec. # of a certified mailing IF they physically did the certified mailing.
Changes the time period for keeping the paper records from 7 years to 3 years.
Process Servers and Agencies will NO longer be mandated to research and report the results of the traverse. They do have to send a request for the result to the opposing party. If that request is fulfilled then the Licensee must forward the results to DCA.
Process Servers and Agencies no longer are mandated to send all the information to the DCA regarding a service if a traverse hearing has been set. Licensee will still have to notify DCA of the hearing but they only need to supply the case information upon request from DCA.
The third party option to maintain digital records have been changed so that now they can be generated at time of request as long as the records are kept by a third party where as the records are stored in such a manner that the process server or the agency are not able to edit them.
If the Process Server or Agency decides to type the records into the DCA mandated spreadsheet the security settings for those have been changed so that the licensee must keep them on a write-once cd or dvd. You must keep a copy of the cd or dvd onsite and offsite.
It adds a method for licensees to correct typographical errors in or inadvertent omissions from the entry into electronic format of the information contained in the individual process

Negotiations with the City are still ongoing and we have not yet officially endorsed these changes, even though they are parallel to the ones we promoted in our suit. NYSPPSA believes these amendments will help reach our goal in changing the non-sense to sensible and the absurd to common sense. We also believe that these changes represent a fundamental change from the current rules and that it will help Agencies and Process Servers maintain compliance without upending their business practices.

While we see this as a step in the right direction, these amendments fail to change the 24 hour time period to secure the digital records that the city is mandating on both the Process Servers and the Agencies. While it is clear that this mandate fails to recognize our rights as citizens of the United States to participate in religious observance and will completely force a restructuring of many of our business practices they have yet to change this requirement. DCA has also failed to state any benefit that such a restrictive time allotment will have . The amended rules also fails to address our concerns of the DCA’s attempt to extort additional funds from Process Servers that fail to obtain a $10,000.00 bond. The Agency’s requirement to mandate a NON-REFUNDABLE and RECURRING payment of $1,000.00 is not within the confines of the law.

There is still time for us to come to a compromise with the City and we are in discussions with them every day. You can now see for yourself the progress your donations have brought to these rules and the benefit they have on our daily work life. With your continued support we can create a set of rules that we all can agree with. So please if you haven’t donated please do so and if you have donated please donate again.

Simultaneous to our negotiations with the corporate counsel of the City of New York representing the DCA has been continued negotiations with the City Council regarding aspects of the core law. NYSPPSA has not capitulated in any way to any of the City's demands to achieve the current results. Our lawsuit is still pending and will be so as negotiations continue. Our goal is to see this to the end. That is a realistic goal if the financial support of our members continues. As we all can plainly see, our association, along with our wonderful attorneys have prevailed to the benefit of all process servers in the city.

We are still reviewing the GPS proposed rules and at first glance appear not to inflict any burden on licensed agencies. Pursuant to the city law there will be a 60 day moratorium following final adoption of rules by the DCA. More on the GPS will be forthcoming. This hearing on June 132011 supplants the previous scheduled public hearing date of January 27 2011 which was snowed out. As stated before we suggest that no one become obligated to an advertised program or product until the rules are finalized.

Thanks again to all our members for your time and patience through this grueling process. My continued thanks to Co-administrator Rob Gillis whose technical savvy is unmatched and NYSPPSA Treasurer Billy Mlotok whose wisdom and input are invaluable.

Thank you
Larry Yellon.

Now NY Process Servers can convert out of State subpoenas saving our Out of State attorneys time and money!

info@mywebsy.com (Garcia) — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 20:17:21 GMT

Now NY Process Servers can convert out of State subpoenas saving our Out of State attorneys time and money!

From the New York Law Journal
February 22, 2011
“CPLR §3119, a newly enacted provision of the CPLR, effective Jan. 1, 2011, holds the promise to make it substantially easier to seek discovery in New York for cases pending outside of New York.”

This new rule will make it easier to issue a subpoena for discovery (including documents and depositions) in New York for use in a court action in another state.
Prior to the new rule, a party to litigation in another state that wished to issue a subpoena to a witness in New York had to rely on CPLR 3102(e), which required a number of steps, including a court order, before a subpoena could be issued.
CPLR 3119 simplifies the process for issuing a subpoena in New York for an out-of-state action by eliminating the need to commence a formal proceeding and obtain a court order. The rule offers two options. For the first option, an out-of-state subpoena (a subpoena issued under the authority of another state court) may be submitted to the clerk of the New York state court in the county where the discovery will take place. The clerk, “in accordance with that court’s procedure,” then must promptly issue a New York state subpoena for service on the person to whom the out-of-state subpoena is directed. The subpoena must incorporate the terms of the out-of-state subpoena and contain the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all counsel of record and any party not represented by counsel The out of state attorney should submit the proposed New York subpoena in addition to the out-of-state subpoena. Each document needs to mirror the other in content in addition the court has required that the NY subpoena include a reference to the originating court of the out of state subpoena.

asupoena

Updates to Proofs of Service Requirements in New York State

Updates to Proofs of Service Requirements in New York State

Affirmations Added to The Toolbox Of New York State Process Servers

Bill A05772

Breaking News: The Log Book Bill

Breaking News: The Log Book Bill

New York halts evictions due to corona-virus pandemic and other Court updates

New York halts evictions due to corona-virus pandemic and other Court updates

New York City Rule changes, Simplify or Shifty

New York City Rule changes, Simplify or Shifty

Things are going on in the City of New York that will affect the service of process Nationwide.

Facts:

Some History

The result: The DCWP (formerly DCA) started auditing process servers and this is what they found:

The Present: What is happening now

This is a 22 Page document filled with:

It starts with 2-231- 2 Definitions.

It goes on to section 2-233 Records –

Another change that is being questioned comes under D (2) Integrity of Record:

2-235 Preparation of Affidavits: goes hand in hand with the above

One of the most controversial changes has to do with section 2-240 Audits:

Section A :

Eliminates the 2-month cap on the period of time that can be audited

Then we get to Section 12, the most egregious section, which deals with the penalty schedule.

So do you believe the purpose set forth in the proposal or do you believe something else is going on here?

Effective starting April 7th, 2022 The Consumer Credit Fairness Act

Effective starting April 7th, 2022 The Consumer Credit Fairness Act ﻿

Two major changes go into effect April 7th2022

Additional changes go into effect regard filing and notice requirements on May 7th, 2022 including:

Changes to the Complaint:

Changes to the filing proof of service

Changes to the Motion for Default Judgement

Objections and Defense

New York Evictions 2022

New York Evictions 2022

The Digital Transformation of the Court System

The Not Unified Court System

New Rights for Tenants

aSubpoena Service, LLC stays in front of these issues to make this less stressful for our clients.

Let aSubpoena serve your eviction cases in Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, and Orange counties.

EVICTION FAQS

How does a landlord evict a tenant in New York State?

What are the common causes of and types of Evictions?

How do you start a Non-payment Proceeding?

What is a Holdover Proceeding?

How do you start a Holdover Eviction?

What does service of the Notice mean?

What happens if the tenant ignores the Initial Notices?

How do you Serve the Notice of Petition and Petition?

You need a team on your side that moves fast and is reliable to get your cases served, comply with the rules of service, and watch the complex timing of these cases.

aSubpoena Service LLC has the experience and know how to serve and file your eviction papers in Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, and Orange counties.

Simplify your life by using aSubpoena for Serving and Filing.

Breaking News: The Clock Restarted in New York on Court Cases

Breaking News: The Clock Restarted in New York on Court Cases

Breaking News: E-filing Commences for Non Essential Matters

Breaking News: E-filing Commences for Non Essential Matters

Executive Order Extends Tolling

Executive Order Extends Tolling ﻿

A note regarding Domestication of Subpoenas and Criminal Cases: NY, NJ

A note regarding Domestication of Subpoenas and Criminal Cases: NY, NJ ﻿

J Gary Pretlow Introduces a bill to help Process Servers In NYC

J Gary Pretlow Introduces a bill to help Process Servers In NYC ﻿

NYSPPSA 10th Annual Conference

NYSPPSA 10th Annual Conference

The State of New Jersey simplifies the procedure to convert and domesticate a foreign state’s subpoena

The State of New Jersey simplifies the procedure to convert and domesticate a foreign state’s subpoena ﻿

NY E-Filing …. New York State Court E- Filing

NY E-Filing …. New York State Court E- Filing

New Forms for Request of Judicial Intervention (RJI) for NY State

New Forms for Request of Judicial Intervention (RJI) for NY State ﻿

Governor Andrew M Cuomo vetoes legislation detrimental to Process Servers

Governor Andrew M Cuomo vetoes legislation detrimental to Process Servers

New Information from NYPPSA in the ongoing Negotiations with NYC DCA

New Information from NYPPSA in the ongoing Negotiations with NYC DCA ﻿

Now NY Process Servers can convert out of State subpoenas saving our Out of State attorneys time and money!

Now NY Process Servers can convert out of State subpoenas saving our Out of State attorneys time and money!

Effective starting April 7th, 2022 The Consumer Credit Fairness Act

Executive Order Extends Tolling

A note regarding Domestication of Subpoenas and Criminal Cases: NY, NJ

J Gary Pretlow Introduces a bill to help Process Servers In NYC

The State of New Jersey simplifies the procedure to convert and domesticate a foreign state’s subpoena

New Forms for Request of Judicial Intervention (RJI) for NY State

New Information from NYPPSA in the ongoing Negotiations with NYC DCA