New Yorkers Deserve Justice at Home

New Yorkers Deserve Justice at Home

For more than a century, New York has stood for a simple, commonsense principle: if you profit here, you play by the rules here. When corporations do business in New York and cause harm to New Yorkers, our courts should be open to hold them accountable.

Unfortunately, recent court decisions have undermined that principle — leaving injured New Yorkers stranded while out-of-state corporations evade responsibility.

Gov. Kathy Hochul now has the opportunity to restore fairness by signing the Home Court Justice Act.

A Longstanding New York Rule of Fairness

New York law has historically followed a straightforward rule: when a corporation operates in New York and causes harm to a New Yorker, the case belongs in a New York court.

This principle dates back more than a century. In 1916, Justice Benjamin Cardozo articulated the concept that corporations benefitting from New York’s marketplace should be accountable in New York’s courts. That rule protected New Yorkers and ensured that justice was accessible, efficient, and fair.

How the Courts Weakened Accountability

That protection began to erode in recent years.

In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman sharply limited general jurisdiction over corporations. Then, in 2021, the New York Court of Appeals further narrowed access to New York courts in Aybar v. Aybar.

The Aybar case arose from a tragic 2012 rollover crash involving a defective Ford vehicle. A New York family — who lived, worked, and paid taxes in this state — sought justice in a New York court. Despite Ford’s extensive operations in New York, the court ruled the family could not bring their case here.

Instead, they were forced to pursue their claims out of state.

The Practical Impact on Injured New Yorkers

For many injured people, being forced to litigate in a distant forum is not just inconvenient — it is prohibitive.

Out-of-state litigation increases costs, delays resolution, and places enormous strain on injured individuals and their families. Too often, valid claims are abandoned altogether because pursuing justice far from home is simply unrealistic.

This system benefits large, multinational corporations at the expense of everyday New Yorkers.

A Straightforward and Constitutional Solution

The Home Court Justice Act offers a clear and reasonable fix.

In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Pennsylvania’s law allowing residents and visitors to hold corporations accountable in Pennsylvania courts when they are injured there. That law is broader than New York’s proposed legislation — and it has not driven businesses out of Pennsylvania.

New York’s proposal is even more narrowly tailored. It applies only to:

• New York residents
• New York businesses
• Corporations that choose to operate in New York

In other words, it simply restores balance.

New Yorkers are already subject to general jurisdiction in our courts. There is no justification for exempting out-of-state corporations from the same rules when they profit from operating here.

Why This Issue Matters Now

This issue has gained statewide attention, including in The Buffalo News, where Attorney Kate Feroleto was recently published discussing the importance of restoring access to New York courts for injured residents. The growing public conversation reflects what many New Yorkers already know: justice should not depend on geography or corporate loopholes.

A Choice About Fairness

Gov. Hochul now faces a clear choice:
restore accountability and access to justice — or preserve a loophole that favors multinational corporations over the people of New York.

Justice should not depend on where a corporation is headquartered or how far an injured person must travel to be heard. New Yorkers deserve the right to seek justice close to home.