Assembly passes bill barring courts from denying class certification solely because suit involves government

Albany — The New York State Assembly on March 24 passed Assembly Bill 1550, a measure that prohibits courts from denying class certification solely because a lawsuit involves a governmental operation, the Assembly clerk read during floor action, and members approved the bill by a vote of 99 to 48.

The bill’s sponsor, Assemblymember Solasz, said the measure “just states that courts cannot deny a class certification solely because a lawsuit involves a governmental operation,” arguing the change would ensure that low-income and other marginalized New Yorkers can pursue collective legal remedies against government entities.

Supporters told colleagues that the bill aims to clarify the Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) so that governmental entities are not treated as a special litigant that automatically blocks class certification. Assemblymember Solasz said the bill does not remove judicial scrutiny; plaintiffs must still meet CPLR prerequisites such as numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy of representation.

Opponents, including Assemblymember Angelino and others, urged caution. Angelino cited the governor’s prior veto of similar legislation and warned of potential financial exposure to taxpayers and higher litigation costs. He said he expected the governor “will probably veto this again” and announced he would vote no. Other critics pointed to longstanding Court of Appeals precedent and said the judiciary’s discretion should not be disturbed.

During debate, members referenced existing exceptions in case law where courts may deny class certification against governmental entities — for example, when the entity has failed to comply with court orders or when individual suits are feasible and timely relief is not needed — and disputed whether statutory clarification was necessary.

Assemblymember Walsh asked whether the bill had been modified since last year; Solasz replied it had not, and that sponsors were pursuing the same language while adjusting strategy. The sponsor and supporters emphasized access to justice for public-housing residents, low-income litigants and other groups that may lack resources to bring individual suits.

A party vote was requested and recorded. The tally was 99 ayes and 48 noes; the Assembly clerk announced, “The bill is passed.” The measure will be sent to the governor; members noted the governor vetoed a similar bill last year.

Votes at a glance

- Assembly Bill 1550 (amend CPLR to bar denial of class certification solely because suit involves governmental operations) — passed, 99–48. - Assembly Bill (Village of East Syracuse nonresident justice authorization, calendar 64) — passed, Ayes 143, Noes 0 (recorded on consent calendar). - Assembly Bill 3392-A (amend domestic relations law, calendar 65) — passed, Ayes 142, Noes 2 (recorded on consent calendar). - Assembly Bill 5295 (amend Indian Law; restoring recognition for Montaukett-related matters, calendar 66) — passed, Ayes 144, Noes 0 (recorded on consent calendar). - Assembly Bill (amend general municipal law and the executive law, calendar 67) — passed, Ayes 144, Noes 0 (recorded on consent calendar). - Multiple ceremonial legislative resolutions recognizing observances and proclamations (Assembly numbers 245–250) — adopted (voice votes) on the floor.

Context and significance

Sponsor supporters framed the bill as an access-to-justice measure to allow class procedures to proceed against government agencies when the statutory prerequisites are otherwise met. Opponents argued the bill could increase litigation exposure for state and local governments and said existing CPLR practice and Court of Appeals precedent already permit appropriate case-by-case judicial decision-making.

What’s next

Because the Assembly approved the bill, it will be transmitted to the governor. Members on the floor noted the governor vetoed a similar measure last year; whether the governor will sign or veto the current bill is not recorded in the session transcript. If signed, the bill’s effective date is stated on the floor as immediate.