Times Union: Grieving Families Act heads to Hochul's desk for third time

By: Dan Clark

Supporters of a bill that would allow families who file wrongful death lawsuits to seek damages based on their grief from losing a loved one are now waiting to see if Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoes it for a third time.

The bill was sent to Hochul’s desk Thursday by the Legislature, setting the deadline for her to make a decision by Christmas Eve.

It’s a measure that has rare, bipartisan support in the Legislature, which is unusual for items considered to be controversial. That kind of favor usually near-guarantees approval from the governor. This bill is the exception.

“I am hopeful that the governor sees the wisdom in coming to the table and recognizes the urgent need to update the outdated and discriminatory wrongful death law,” said state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Democrat from Manhattan who sponsored the bill.

The bill, which supporters call the Grieving Families Act, would allow families to seek damages based on the grief or anguish endured as a result of the death.

When families file a wrongful death lawsuit, current law only allows them to seek damages from the person or entity responsible for the death based on their late family member’s financial value.

If that person had a job, for example, the lawsuit could seek the income lost to the family because of their death. But if that person has no income, like a child, there are no damages to be sought in that case.

That leaves New York with a justice system that benefits some, but not all, said Victoria Wickman, president of the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, which supports the bill.

“This law deepens existing disparities, particularly for children, seniors, people with disabilities, families of color, and women,” Wickman said. “It fails to hold wrongdoers accountable and is fundamentally unjust.”

The legislation is not complicated but the implications of Hochul’s decision are.

While it received broad support in the Legislature, it’s a different story outside the walls of the state Capitol. Industry leaders in business and health care have lobbied against it and want Hochul to reject it once again.

Stakeholders in health care argue that it would drive up the cost of insurance for medical malpractice, which they say could discourage doctors and other health care professionals from starting their career in New York or relocating here.

“Many communities are already struggling to attract and retain enough physicians and other health care professionals,” said Bea Grause, president of the Healthcare Association of New York State. 

“This liability-expanding bill will exacerbate these workforce challenges while forcing New York’s fiscally strained hospitals and health systems to take on millions of dollars in new costs,” she added.

When Hochul vetoed the bill last year, she cited the potential impact on the health care industry as a main driver of her decision.

“Legitimate concerns have been raised that the bill would likely lead to increased insurance premiums for the vast majority of consumers, as well as risk the financial well-being of our health care facilities,” Hochul wrote.

That sent the Legislature back to the drawing board. That was disappointing for Assemblywoman Helene Weinstein, a Democrat from Brooklyn who first introduced the bill in 1995. This is her last year in office after nearly 44 years in the Assembly.

“For over 30 years, I have sponsored this bill,” Weinstein said. “But it has been beyond frustrating that this governor has for two years in a row vetoed this sensible change.”

Lawmakers have since rewritten, introduced and passed a new version of the bill with tighter language they hope will assuage the concerns Hochul expressed last year.

But opponents say the amended legislation would have the same impact on industries that opposed the bill last year. Ashley Ranslow, New York director of the National Federation of Independent Business, said it would drive up insurance costs.

“These skyrocketing premiums will force many to close their doors, putting livelihoods at risk,” Ranslow said. “This bill will disrupt the delicate balance that keeps our local businesses afloat.”

Democrats could have voted to override Hochul’s veto at the start of the year, when they had the numbers to do so. They held a veto-proof supermajority in both the state Senate and Assembly in January.

But Republicans flipped a seat in the state Senate in last month’s elections, breaking the supermajority Democrats held in the Senate. That means an override won’t be an option this time if the bill is rejected for a third time.

Hoylman-Sigal said their work on the bill since Hochul’s last veto addressed the changes she sought, even if opponents disagree.

“The amendments to the bill reflect the changes the governor asked for in her veto messages — and show we have come to the table and are ready to get this done,” he said.