Foreword to the Conference Report: The New York City Housing Court in the 21st Century: Can It Better Address the Problems Before It?

• Author: Ellen Yaroshefsky/Marilyn J. Flood
• Position: Clinical Professor of Law /Counsel to NYCLA
• Pages: 591-600

Page 591

Ellen Yaroshefsky is a Clinical Professor of Law and the Executive Director of the Jacob Burns Ethics Center at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. She was on the planning committee for this conference. She extends gratitude to the other members of the planning committee and to all those who assisted in organizing this conference, to its many participants, and to those who authored articles for this issue of the Journal. The planning committee is especially grateful to Marilyn Flood, NYCLA conference chair, whose dedication and tireless efforts made this conference successful.

Marilyn Flood is the counsel to NYCLA and Executive Director of the NYCLA Foundation.

The conference was cosponsored by the Jacob Burns Ethics Center at Cardozo Law School, Columbia Law School, and the Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics of Fordham University School of Law.

Introduction

On October 28-29, 2004, at a conference hosted by the Justice Center of the New York County Lawyers' Association (NYCLA), a diverse group of professionals gathered to consider how the New York City Housing Court is facing the many challenges of the coming decades (the "Conference"). Occasioned by the Court's thirtieth anniversary, the Conference participants examined not only the legal questions-housing conditions, holdovers, nonpayment of rent, and the proposed right to counsel in Housing Court-but the underlying and coexisting social and financial problems of those who appear in Housing Court. Such problems, left unaddressed, can and do lead to homelessness.

This Conference was an important first step in developing recommendations to improve the Housing Court, and this issue of the Cardozo Public Law, Policy, and Ethics Journal presents the reports of the Conference, the recommendations of the Working Groups, and significant articles authored by Conference participants. These articles, drafted in advance of the Conference, were distributed to all participantsPage 592 and discussed during the workshops. They provide an important context for the Conference's recommendations.

Conference Purpose and Format

The invitational Conference had eighty-two participants representing an array of experience and perspectives. The participants were drawn from both the landlord and tenants bars, the judiciary, government, legal academia, and public advocacy organizations. The overarching goal was to identify and propose ways in which the Housing Court might meet its future challenges and address the legal and social issues that come before it.

The Conference began on the evening of October 28 with welcoming remarks from Norman Reimer, President of NYCLA, and a keynote speech by Hon. Fern A. Fisher, Administrative Judge of the Civil Court of the City of New York, followed by a reception for current and former Housing Court judges. The welcoming remarks provided an important overview of the Housing Court, reflecting on its accomplishments and recent innovations while acknowledging that it faces significant challenges.

On October 29, Hon. Jonathan Lippman, Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts, gave remarks recognizing the significance of the Housing Court and the dedication and excellence of its judges. Afterwards, the following plenary panelists provided an overview of the critical issues confronting the Housing Court: Hon. Fern A. Fisher, moderator; John D. Feerick, Chair, NYCLA Justice Center, and former Dean, Fordham Law School; Hon. Marcy S. Friedman, New York State Supreme Court; Maria Mottola, Executive Director, New York Foundation; Professor Conrad A. Johnson, Columbia Law School; and Jonathan Newman, Finkelstein Newman LLP.

Conference participants spent the rest of the day working in small groups discussing a particular area significant to the delivery of justice in the Housing Court. These areas were:

1. Pre-adjudication steps in the Housing Court

2. The adjudicative process and the role of the Court

3. Right to counsel

4. Litigants of diminished capacity

5. Preserving the housing stock: are there new ways to approach housing issues and measure results?

6. Social services and volunteer programs in the CourtPage 593

In a closing plenary session, the Working Groups reported their recommendations to other Conference participants.

Summary of the Working Groups and Recommendations

While each of the groups had a distinct mission, there were often common issues and complementary recommendations. All of the groups discussed the Housing Court's overwhelming workload and the problems engendered by summary proceedings. Overall, the groups recognized the need to improve representation in Housing Court; to gather information and to improve data collection; to provide additional resources, especially for litigants of diminished capacity; and to divert cases from Housing Court to appropriate social service agencies. Notably, the Conference...