Court of Appeals Title
   
Advanced Decision Search
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer
Spacer

Home Certified Questions (500.27)

Below is a listing of Rule 500.27 certified questions pending before the Court, stating the issue(s) certified and their status. Please call the Clerk's Office if you have any questions.

For those certified questions that proceed to briefing in the normal course, the briefing schedule generally will be: appellant's brief to be filed 60 days after the Court accepts the certification; respondent's brief to be filed 45 days after the date set for the filing of appellant's brief; and a reply brief, if any, to be filed 15 days after the date set for the filing of respondent's brief.

The Court welcomes motions for amicus curiae participation from those qualified and interested in the subject matter of these certified questions. Please refer to Rule 500.23 and direct any questions to the Clerk's Office.


 

SCHOENEFELD v STATE OF NEW YORK et al.:

By order entered April 8, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following question to this Court:

"Under New York Judiciary Law § 470, which mandates that a nonresident attorney maintain an 'office for the transaction of law business' within the state of New York, what are the minimum requirements necessary to satisfy that mandate?"

On May 6, 2014, the Court accepted the certified question. The case is being briefed.


 

IN RE: SANTIAGO-MONTEVERDE (SANTIAGO-MONTEVERDE v PEREIRA):

By order entered March 31, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following question to this Court:

"Whether a debtor-tenant possesses a property interest in the protected value of her rent-stabilized lease that may be exempted from her bankruptcy estate pursuant to New York State Debtor and Creditor Law Section 282(2) as a 'local public assistance benefit'?"

On May 13, 2014, the Court accepted the certified question. The case is being briefed.


 

NGUYEN v HOLDER:

By order entered February 19, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following question to this Court:

"Does section 5(3) of New York's Domestic Relations Law void as incestuous a marriage between an uncle and niece 'of the half blood' (that is, where the husband is the half-brother of the wife's mother)?"

On March 27, 2014, the Court accepted the certified question. The case is being briefed.


 

RAMOS v SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP:

By order entered January 23, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following questions to this Court:

"1. What deference, if any, should a court pay to an agency's decision, made for its own enforcement purposes, to construe section 220 of the NYLL prospectively only, when the court is deciding the meaning of that section for a period of time arising before the agency's decision?

2. Does a party's commitment to pay prevailing wages pursuant to NYLL section 220 bind it to pay those wages only for work activities that were clearly understood by the parties to be covered by section 220, or does it require the party to pay prevailing wages for all the work activities that are ultimately deemed by a court or agency to be 'covered' by that portion of the statute?"

On February 13, 2014, the Court accepted the certified questions. The case is being briefed.


 

MOTOROLA CREDIT CORPORATION v STANDARD CHARTERED BANK:

By order entered January 14, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified the following questions to this Court:

"First, whether the separate entity rule precludes a judgment creditor from ordering a garnishee bank operating branches in New York to turn over a debtor's assets held in foreign branches of the bank; and Second, whether the separate entity rule precludes a judgment creditor from ordering a garnishee bank operating branches in NewYork to restrain a debtor's assets held in foreign branches of the bank."

On February 18, 2014, the Court accepted the certified questions. On March 27, 2014, the Court marked the first certified question withdrawn. The case is being briefed.