Statutory requirements conditioning suit against a governmental entity must be strictly construed

In this CPLR Article 78 Petitioner sought judicial review of a determination of the City of Newburgh [City] to adopt the findings and recommendation of a disciplinary hearing officer made pursuant to Civil Service Law §75 in which the hearing officer found the Petitioner guilty of certain charges of misconduct and recommended the termination of Petitioner's employment as a City police officer. Petitioner appealed the City's decision.

City had filed an answer to Petitioner's appeal with objections in point of law, including that the Petitioner failed to serve a notice of timely claim as required by Section C6.47 of the City's Charter. Petitioner thereupon moved for leave to serve a late notice of claim. 

Supreme Court granted Petitioner's motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim and transferred the proceeding to the Appellate Division pursuant to CPLR 7804(g). The Appellate Division, however, vacated so much of the Supreme Court's order as granted the Petitioner's motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim, dismissed the Article 78 proceeding and ordered one bill of costs to the City.

The Appellate Division, citing Clayton Indus., Inc. v City of Newburgh, 17 AD3d 309, noted that Section C6.47(A) of the City's Charter provides that with respect to non-tort claims:

1. No action or special proceeding shall be maintained against the City unless "a written verified claim ... was served on the City ... within three months after the accrual of such claim";

2. Service of a notice of claim is a condition precedent to maintaining an action or proceeding against the City; and

3. Statutory requirements conditioning suit against a governmental entity must be strictly construed.

Noting that it is undisputed that Petitioner failed to serve a notice of claim within three months after his claim accrued as required by Section C6.47 of the City Charter , "unlike other notice statutes, section C6.47 of the City Charter for the City of Newburgh does not provide courts with the authority to extend the time for the service of a notice of claim arising upon nontort claims."

In the words of the Appellate Division, "...  since this proceeding is not founded upon tort, the Supreme Court was without authority to grant the [Petitioner's] motion for leave to serve a late notice of claim ... and it should have dismissed the proceeding on the ground that the [Petitioner] failed to timely serve a notice of claim as required by section C6.47 of the City Charter for the City of Newburgh".

Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.

Determining if statements between an employee and the employee's employer constitute slander per se

In this action, Plaintiff and third-party defendant, a Town employee [Employee], became embroiled in a personal dispute after the Town prohibited Employee from using the Town's equipment to move certain gear associated with a concession stand business that Employee operated on property maintained by the Town.

Employee sought and obtained a decision by a New York State Supreme Court justice which denied the Town's motion for summary judgment dismissing Employee's complaint and granted Employee's cross-motion for summary judgment on the Employee's complaint, which asserts a single cause of action, slander per se. Town appealed the Supreme Court's rulings.

The Appellate Division unanimously reversed the Supreme Court's decision "on the law without costs", granted Town's motion to dismiss the Employee's appeal and dismissed Employee's complaint.

Turning to the issue of whether the Employee's statements made during the incident are actionable, the Appellate Division said it must consider the statements "in [their] applicable context" and "in terms of [their] effect upon the average listener" and [to] determine whether a reasonable listener would consider the statements to connote fact or nonactionable opinion, we must evaluate:

"(1) whether the specific language in issue has a precise meaning which is readily understood; 

"(2) whether the statements are capable of being proven true or false; and 

"(3) whether either the full context of the communication in which the statement appears or the broader social context and surrounding circumstances are such as to signal . . . listeners that what is being . . . heard is likely to be opinion, not fact".

In the instant matter the Appellate Division concluded that the Employee's inflammatory insults "are nonactionable rhetorical hyperbole, particularly given the rhetorical manner in which the statements were uttered".

Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.

Court Notices 75 / Rules of the Chief Administrator

AMENDMENT OF RULE 

Rules of the Chief Administrator 

Pursuant to the authority vested in me, and with the advice and consent of the Administrative Board of the Courts, I hereby amend paragraph 2 of subdivision (b) of section 137.1 and subdivision (B) of section 8 of Appendix A to Part 137 of the Rules of the Chief Administrator, effective November 1, 2026, to read as follows: 

Section 137.1. 

Application 

(b) This Part shall not apply to any of the following: 

(2) amounts in dispute involving a sum less than $1,000 or more than [$50,000] $100,000, except that an arbitral body may hear disputes involving other amounts if the parties have consented; 

APPENDIX A. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 

Section 8. Selection and Assignment of Neutrals 

 B. Unless otherwise approved by the Board: 

1. Disputes involving a sum of less than [$10,000] $20,000 shall be submitted to one attorney arbitrator; 

2. Disputes involving a sum of [$10,000] $20,000 or more shall be submitted to a panel of three arbitrators, which shall include at least one nonlawyer member of the public.

Posted In the New York State Register, August 12, 2026 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Vol. XLVIII Division of Administrative Rules Issue 32

 

GOVERNOR HOCHUL ANNOUNCES RATIFICATION OF FIVE-YEAR LABOR AGREEMENT WITH PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FEDERATION

 

Contract Approved With Overwhelming PEF Member Support

 

Agreement With PEF Covers 60,000 New York State Employees

 

Agreement Includes Yearly Salary Increases, Increases in Location Pay and Changes in Health Benefits

 

 

On August 18, 2026, New York State Governor Kathy Hochul announced the ratification of a five-year labor agreement with the Public Employees Federation (PEF) which includes approximately 60,000 New York State employees in a wide variety of professional, scientific and technical titles. The agreement, which runs until April 1, 2031, won the approval of 88 percent of PEF members who cast ballots.

 

“Public employees provide vital services every day to New Yorkers everywhere, and this agreement recognizes their hard work, professionalism and contributions,” Governor Hochul said. “New York values its talented public servants, and this agreement underscores my administration’s support and dedication to the Empire State’s public workforce. I thank PEF’s leadership in helping realize this deal, and I applaud PEF’s members for their continued commitment to serving New Yorkers all across this state.”

 

Public Employees Federation President Wayne Spence said, “While contract negotiations can be challenging, we appreciate Governor Kathy Hochul’s leadership in forging an agreement that works for the 62,000 professional, scientific, and technical staff represented by the NYS Public Employees Federation as well as for the residents of New York. We look forward to continuing to work with the Governor to improve the safe, efficient and effective delivery of services for every New Yorker.”

 

The ratified contract includes raises in each of the five years of the agreement, as follows: 4.5 percent, 4 percent, 3.5 percent, 3 percent, and 3 percent. The contract also includes boosts to location pay and several other unit-specific payments. Members also will gain 20 hours of paid pre-natal leave and an increase in the cap for sick leave accumulation. The agreement also includes reasonable updates to health insurance that will reduce costs for members by eliminating certain co-pays and providing incentives to use in-network providers.

 

 

###

 

Basics of the workers’ compensation system, including insurance types, coverage requirements, and employers’ obligations under the law

The New York State Workers' Compensation Board continues its monthly webinar series for employers and human resources (HR) representatives.

On Wednesday, September 16, 2026, 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m., the Board’s Office of the Advocate for Business will present on the basics of the workers’ compensation system, including insurance types, coverage requirements, and employers’ obligations under the law.

The one-hour presentation will also cover:

• who needs coverage and who does not need coverage,
• how and when to report an injury or illness,
• considerations when hiring independent contractors, laborers, and domestic workers,
• lowering premiums, and
• penalties and where to go for assistance with them

…all topics business owners and other employers, as well as their HR staff, should know about!

The session is free and there will be time at the end for questions.

Click to Register here

More information and contacts

Visit the Advocate for Business section of the Board’s website for additional resources.

You can also call the Office of the Advocate for Business at (518) 486-3331 or email advocatebusiness@wcb.ny.gov.

Having trouble?

If you are having trouble registering for or attending either of these webinars, check out these Webinar FAQs.