Statement of Muriel Goode-Trufant, First Assistant Corporation Counsel, New York City Law Department, Before the New York City Council Committee on Public Safety

March 27, 2023

Good Afternoon. My name is Muriel Goode-Trufant and I am privileged to serve as the First Assistant Corporation Counsel. I am pleased to be here to offer the Law Department’s comments regarding Int. 944 which is before you today. I am joined by Eric Eichenholtz, Managing Attorney of the Law Department, Beth Nedow, Deputy Chief for Practice Management in the Litigation Support Division and Nancy Savasta, the Deputy Chief of the Tort Division in charge of Risk Management.

Int. 944 would impose new requirements upon the Law Department to compile and upload particular information regarding certain civil actions filed in state or federal court against the Police Department, individual police officers, or both. As proposed, the amendment would mandate reporting within fifteen days of receipt of new cases and/or case dispositions, meaning that the Law Department would be required to post information every business day of the year. Similarly, in keeping with the notice requirement of Administrative Code Section 7-114, on every business day notices would be sent to the Department of Investigation, the Comptroller, the Police Department, the Civilian Complaint Review Board and the Commission to Combat Police Corruption concerning case activity. Further, on a quarterly basis, the number of new civil actions alleging improper police conduct and the number of case resolutions would be disclosed to the same entities.

In compliance with Administrative Code Section 7-114, since 2018 the Law Department has posted on our public facing website information on certain cases which includes claims involving the use of force, assault and battery, malicious prosecution, and false arrest or imprisonment. The posted information includes the court in which the civil action was filed, the name of the law firm representing the plaintiff, the name of the law firm or agency representing each defendant, the date the action was filed, the kind of improper police conduct alleged in the action, and, if the action has been resolved, the date of its resolution, the manner in which it was resolved, whether the resolution included a payment to the plaintiff by the City and, if so, the amount of such payment.

The Law Department has been supportive of the Council’s intent to provide more transparency. We have successfully increased transparency through the Law Department’s publishing of five--year summaries of case dispositions in matters with alleged improper conduct by police twice a year. In order to ensure accuracy, the Law Department conducts extensive reviews, research, and quality assurance to make these biannual reports as accurate as possible. The proposal to require posting fifteen days after each complaint is received or a lawsuit is settled would ensure that posted information would be inaccurate, frustrating the very purpose of the public disclosure.

The Law Department is handling approximately 5,114 state and federal cases with allegations of alleged police improper conduct. For the first six months of this fiscal year, approximately 546 new cases were received and 552 were disposed. Overall, our Office represents the Police Department and individual members of service in more than 7,000 cases. Often we receive complaints with officers named as John Does, or with misspelled or commonplace names.

When the Law Department receives a complaint, we review the allegations in the pleading and work to obtain necessary records to understand the factual and legal underpinnings of this case. This process invariably takes time and publicizing information about cases in a period as short as 15 days would lead to premature and inaccurate information. For example, unless there is a conviction in the underlying criminal case that is the subject of the complaint, the Law Department must secure a release from the plaintiff pursuant to NY Criminal Procedure Law Section 160.50 in order to access sealed arrest records. In the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, plaintiffs are required to serve a 160.50 release with their civil rights complaint.

Thereafter, in recognition of the time required to access police records, identify the involved officers and make representation decisions, answers to complaints are due eighty (80) days after the service of the complaint. Releases are not required to be served with complaints in state court actions and thus identification of the officers can take, at best, many months. Further, both parties and claims are added and dropped as civil discovery progresses. A malicious prosecution claim against several unnamed police officers may change into a false arrest case against two named officers. Thus, information that might be posted by the Law Department with fifteen days of the receipt of a complaint would invariably be inaccurate or simply wrong, because a party was erroneously named in the complaint.

Problems would also arise in reporting case dispositions within fifteen days of resolution. After the parties agree to settle a case, the Comptroller’s Office has up to ninety (90) days to pay the settlement. During that ninety-day period, there are various lien checks, including for outstanding child support, that are conducted. As a result, the settlement amount and the amount paid to the plaintiff by the City may be different. A settlement reported within fifteen days of the agreement may not reflect what the City ultimately pays to the plaintiff.

Moreover, the current time frame of publication every six months ensures proper vetting of the relevant data for accuracy. This vetting is both time consuming and necessary. We urge the Council not to implement a fifteen day reporting period which would require daily uploads of flawed and often premature information to a public website.

With respect to the proposal for the quarterly report of statistical data, the Law Department could furnish such data and we look forward to working with Council on that aspect of the bill.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on Int. 944. My colleagues and I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

###