Filed Date: April 24, 2018
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
Under New York law, records must be sealed from cases where the prosecutor declined to pursue charges, the charges were later dismissed, or the allegations were disproven in court. On April 24, 2018, three plaintiffs brought a class action suit against the city of New York and New York City Police Department Commissioner challenging the use of the sealed records. The plaintiffs alleged that New York Police Department (NYPD) policy and practice allowed the use of information from records of arrest that did not result in criminal convictions to target predominantly Black and Latino people for investigation, arrest, and harsher penalties. They alleged that this practice violated New York law and due process under the New York state constitution. Represented by private counsel and the Bronx Defender Services, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the NYPD to implement protocols, trainings and safeguards to prohibit the improper access, use, or disclosure of sealed records. They also sought damages and attorneys’ fees and costs.
The defendants sought to dismiss the case and, on April 30, 2019, Judge Alexander M. Tisch granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in part and denied the motion in part. The judge agreed with the defendants that based on precedent the plaintiffs failed to state a due process claim. Judge Tisch reasoned that the state’s establishment of procedures to be followed does not automatically imply that the state created a liberty interest that would allow plaintiffs to sue under a due process claim. However, the judge upheld the sufficiency of plaintiffs' causes of action under New York law.
On September 5, 2019, Judge Tisch granted the plaintiffs class action certification. The class was certified as “all those who have sealed records and who have been or may be aggrieved by the NYPD's policies and practices.” The judge agreed with the plaintiffs that there are likely tens of thousands of individuals who would be impacted by this case based on the number of arrests in recent years.
As of February 2020, discovery in this case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Richa Bijlani (2/19/2020)
Frank, Lyle E. (New York)
Tisch, Alexander M. (New York)
Barbour, Sharon L. (New York)
Boettcher, Eric (New York)
Borchetta, Jennifer Rolnick (New York)
Cinnamon, Michael (New York)
Erdelack, Wesley Lyons (New York)
Forneret, Martine B. (New York)
Jain, Niji (New York)
Kolodner, Jonathan Samuel (New York)
Frank, Lyle E. (New York)
Tisch, Alexander M. (New York)
Barbour, Sharon L. (New York)
Boettcher, Eric (New York)
Borchetta, Jennifer Rolnick (New York)
Cinnamon, Michael (New York)
Erdelack, Wesley Lyons (New York)
Forneret, Martine B. (New York)
Jain, Niji (New York)
Kolodner, Jonathan Samuel (New York)
Lee, Annette (New York)
Packrone, Seth Emmanuel (New York)
Pal, Pekham (New York)
Rahman, Shakeer (New York)
Rooney, Kayla Marie (New York)
Steinberg, Johanna B. (New York)
Theobald, Alexandra K. (New York)
Koroleva, Lana (New York)
Robertson, Thomas Bolling (Louisiana)
Last updated March 20, 2023, 3:07 a.m.
State / Territory: New York
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: April 24, 2018
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
All those who have sealed records and who have been or may be aggrieved by the New York Police Department's policies and practices.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
New York City Police Department Commissioner (New York City), City
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General: