Support for legislation that would improve the efficiency of our legal system
SUMMARY
The Trusts, Estates, and Surrogate’s Courts Committee and State Courts of Superior Jurisdiction Committee issued a report supporting legislative amendments to the New York Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act (SCPA) Sections 307 to 309 to enhance service of process procedures. The proposed revisions to SCPA §307 would permit service by certified mail without return receipt, allowing for more efficient, cost-effective, and reliable service, including electronic methods when needed. Changes to SCPA §308 would amend the rules on service periods within and without the State while SCPA §309 would deem service by electronic means to be complete upon transmission of the process to the recipient. The Committees argue these changes will streamline legal processes, reduce administrative costs, and maintain the reliability and integrity of service, and therefore urges the legislature to adopt these revisions to improve the legal system’s efficiency.
Originally issued February 2025; Reissued May 2025
BILL INFORMATION
A.8408 (AM Dais) / S.8175 (Sen. Sepulveda) – Allows certain methods for service of process including by electronic means (NYS 2025).
OUTCOME
Signed by the Governor, Chp. 563 – November 21, 2025
REPORT
REPORT ON LEGISLATION BY THE TRUSTS, ESTATES AND SURROGATE’S COURTS COMMITTEE AND STATE COURTS OF SUPERIOR JURISDICTION COMMITTEE
A.8408 (AM Dais)
S.8175 (Sen. Sepulveda)
AN ACT to amend the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act, in relation to allowing certain methods for service of process.
THIS BILL IS APPROVED
The New York City Bar Association (the “City Bar”), through its Trusts, Estates, and Surrogate’s Courts Committee and State Courts of Superior Jurisdiction Committee (the “Committees”), supports the passage of A.8408 / S.8175, which would amend the following provisions of the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act (“SCPA”):
- Subdivisions 1, 2 and 3 of section 307;
- Paragraph (a) of subdivision 1 of section 308; and
- Paragraphs (a), (e) and (f) of subdivision 2 of section 309.
I. CURRENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK:
Under the current SCPA §307(1), service of process on persons domiciled in New York must be made by personal delivery. Personal delivery to persons domiciled without the state is optional.
Under the current SCPA §307(2), service of process to a nondomiciliary of New York State is allowed by registered or certified mail, physical return receipt requested, or by special mail service. This can delay proceedings and increase costs. See Matter of Pollina, 192 A.D.3d 118 (2d Dept 2020). This requirement, while ensuring proof of delivery, can be cumbersome and inefficient in many cases.
Under the current SCPA §307(3), service of process may be made pursuant to a court order directing alternative service upon a domiciliary natural person unless it is shown through due diligence that service by personal delivery within New York State cannot be affected, or where for good cause shown, personal service within New York State would be impracticable. A non-exhaustive list of methods of alternative service is provided by SCPA §307(3), one of which, SCPA §307(3)(b) is service by mail, by registered or certified mail with or without return receipt requested, or by any manner of special mail service, as the court may direct.
Under the current SCPA §308(1)(a), a citation is to be served at least the following number of days before the return day: (i) 10 days if the person is served within the state; (ii) 20 days if the person is served without the state but within the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or the possessions or territories of the United States; and (iii) 30 days in all other cases.
Under the current SCPA §309(2), the service of process shall be complete when served by: (a) mailing or by registered or certified mail, with or without return receipt requested, upon the mailing thereof; (e) publication, on the 28th day after the first publication; or (f) any other means as the court directs.
A. The proposed revision to SCPA 307 is as follows:
The proposal does not change SCPA §307(1) other than to remove the gender reference “to him” as the object of personal service. Due to the proposed revisions to SCPA §307(2) (discussed below), however, SCPA §307(1) becomes a permissible method of service to persons in New York State, rather than a required form of service.
The proposed changes to SCPA §307(2) would allow service of process by certified mail, without return receipt requested, addressed to the person to be served at their last known address, regardless of the person’s domiciliary status.[1]
The proposed changes to SCPA §307(3) would allow courts to order alternative service upon any person, within or without New York State, if service under the amended subdivisions 1 and 2 cannot be affected or is impracticable. Moreover, the changes to SCPA §307(3)(b) would allow service by electronic means, as defined in CPLR §2103(f)(2), bearing the caption of the matter in the subject line of said transmission. There is an additional proposed change to SCPA §307(3)(d) to include “or her” regarding a person duly designated to receive service on behalf of a respondent.
a) Arguments for the Change:
Efficiency: Allowing service by certified mail without a return receipt requested will expedite the service process, reducing delays associated with waiting for return receipts. This will streamline legal proceedings and improve the overall efficiency of the court system. Additionally, any person residing at the same address as the respondent could sign the return receipt. Therefore, the return receipt is not always indicative of the intended recipient receiving such service.
Cost Reduction: This change will lower administrative costs for both the courts and the parties involved, as the return receipt process incurs additional expenses. Reducing these costs will make the legal process more accessible and less burdensome for all parties.
Reliability: Certified mail provides a reliable means of delivery and documentation, ensuring that the intended recipient is notified. The certified mail receipt from the United States Postal Service serves as proof of mailing, which is sufficient to demonstrate that service has been attempted in good faith[2].
Due Process: The proposed change maintains the integrity of legal proceedings by ensuring that service is still conducted in a manner that is reasonably calculated to inform the parties involved. This method of service aligns with the principles of due process by providing a reliable and documented means of notification.
Special Mail Service: Under SCPA §309(2)(b), Special Mail Service such as the expressly-mentioned United States Postal Service (USPS) Priority Mail Express as well as any other special mail service, is already considered appropriate service without requiring a return receipt or signature[3]. Therefore, it is logical to extend the same standard to certified mail service. Requiring a signature on certified mail service is an unnecessary burden when other forms of special mail service are already accepted without such requirements.
Covid-19 Precedent: During the Covid-19 pandemic, service for everyone was conducted by substituted service, and there was no significant increase in traverse hearings. This demonstrates that alternative methods of service, including those without return receipt requested, can be effective and reliable. The experience during the pandemic provides a practical precedent for adopting more flexible service methods. Additionally, alternative service was often directed to be via electronic means. Most law firms and much of society communicate electronically, and a statutorily-endorsed option makes sense in our ever-growing technological world.
Savings Clause: This amendment should not affect the validity of any service made prior to its effective date. Other methods of service authorized by current law should remain valid alternatives to the method provided herein.
B. The proposed revision to SCPA 308 is as follows:
The proposed changes to SCPA §308(1)(a)(i) would limit the “10 days” service period to those citations served within New York State by personal delivery only. The proposed changes to SCPA 308(1)(a)(ii) would extend the 20-day requirement to service on persons domiciled within or without the state by a method other than personal delivery. The proposed changes to SCPA §308(1)(a)(iii) would broaden the “30 days” service period to include service upon the Office of the Attorney General (OAG).
a) Arguments for the Change:
Due Process: The proposed change maintains the integrity of legal proceedings by ensuring that service is still conducted in a timely manner based upon the method of service. If service may now be made by registered or certified mail to a person in New York State, it logically follows that the time to serve such person should be the same as the time required to serve any other person by registered or certified mail.
Request of the OAG: The OAG has requested the additional time required to be noticed of a proceeding.
C. The proposed revision to SCPA 309 is as follows:
The proposed changes to SCPA §309(2)(a) would remove the reference to service including return receipt requested in line with the changes to SCPA §307. The proposed change to SCPA §309(2)(e) merely removes “or” from the end of the provision as a newly proposed paragraph (f) is inserted. The proposed changes to SCPA §309(2)(f), in line with the addition of service by electronic means as a statutorily-endorsed method of alternative service, would deem service by electronic means to be complete upon transmittal of the process to the recipient. The proposed changes include a new paragraph, SCPA §309(2)(g), for “any other means, as the court directs.”
a) Arguments for the Change:
These changes are necessary due to the changes proposed to SCPA §307.
II. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the proposed amendments to SCPA §§ 307, 308, and 309 would streamline legal processes, reduce costs, and maintain the reliability and integrity of service. We support the passage of A.8408 / S.8175 to improve the efficiency of our legal system.
Trusts, Estates, and Surrogates Courts Committee
Brian P. Corrigan, Chair
Subcommittee Addressing Legislative Proposal to Amend the New York Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act Sections 307 to 309
Pinni Bohm, Co-Chair
P.M. Natasha Chang, Co-Chair
Christopher J. Eisenhardt, Co-Chair
State Courts of Superior Jurisdiction Committee
Amy D. Carlin, Chair
Footnotes
[1] The proposal does not affect the proof of service requirement under SCPA §314.
[2] The Committees discussed the possibility that a mailing could be returned as “undeliverable” following the return date of process. We believe that guidelines directing what should be done in such a scenario be adopted as a court rule rather than included in this proposed legislation.
[3] The Committees discussed the need for SCPA §103(37-a) to be modified to include USPS Priority Mail, which service is superior to that offered by USPS “certified mail” and is equivalent to the permissible “UPS 2nd Day Air” under § 7502(f)(2) of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986.