conflict preemption doctrine in New York

2013Under the doctrine of conflict preemption, a “local government . . . may not exercise its police power by adopting a local law inconsistent with constitutional or general law” (New York State Club Assn. v City of New York, 69 NY2d 211, 217 [1987], affd 487 US 1 [1988]; see DJL Rest.

2013Under the doctrine of conflict preemption, a “local government . . . may not exercise its police power by adopting a local law inconsistent with constitutional or general law” (New York State Club Assn. v City of New York, 69 NY2d 211, 217 [1987], affd 487 US 1 [1988]; see DJL Rest.

2026Aurora , 193 AD3d at 211-212 ; see also Botteon v Borough of Highland Park , 478 NJ Super 452, 466, 315 A3d 816, 824 [NJ App Div 2024]; In Re State Question No. 807, Initiative Petition No. 423 , 2020 OK 57 , 468 P3d 383, 391 [OK Sup Ct 2020]).

2025Aurora , 193 AD3d 207, 210-211 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 NY3d 908 [2021]). [FN3] To the extent that petitioner's argument may be construed as relying upon the State Finance Law, there is no identified "wrongful expenditure, misappropriation, misapplication, or any other illegal or unconstitutional disbursement of state funds" sufficient to invoke same (State Finance Law § 123-b [1]; see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki , 100 NY2d 801, 813-814 [2003], cert denied 540 US 1017 [2003]; Schulz v Silver , 134 AD3d 1369 , 1371 [3d Dept 2015], appeal dismissed 27 NY3d 959 [2016], lv den

2019A local law which merely provides a greater penalty than state law does not run afoul of the conflict preemption doctrine ( see Zakrzewska v New School , 14 NY3d 469, 480 [2010]).

2016With respect to preemption where a local law would “impose prerequisite additional restrictions on rights under State law” (Zakrzewska, 14 NY3d at 480 ), we question whether a police officer’s authority to conduct a stop and frisk falls under the categories of “rights” or “benefits” to which this branch of the conflict preemption doctrine is ordinarily applied (see id.; Jancyn Mfg.

2017State law which has then been curtailed or taken away by the local law’ ” (.Matter of Chwick v Mulvey, 81 AD3d 161, 167-168 [2010], quoting Jancyn Mfg.

2011State law which has then been curtailed or taken away by the local law’ ” (Matter of Chwick v Mulvey, 81 AD3d at 167-168 , quoting Jancyn Mfg.

2026Aurora , 193 AD3d at 211-212 ; see also Botteon v Borough of Highland Park , 478 NJ Super 452, 466, 315 A3d 816, 824 [NJ App Div 2024]; In Re State Question No. 807, Initiative Petition No. 423 , 2020 OK 57 , 468 P3d 383, 391 [OK Sup Ct 2020]).

2026Aurora , 193 AD3d at 211-212 ; see also Botteon v Borough of Highland Park , 478 NJ Super 452, 466, 315 A3d 816, 824 [NJ App Div 2024]; In Re State Question No. 807, Initiative Petition No. 423 , 2020 OK 57 , 468 P3d 383, 391 [OK Sup Ct 2020]).

2025Aurora , 193 AD3d 207, 210-211 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 NY3d 908 [2021]). [FN3] To the extent that petitioner's argument may be construed as relying upon the State Finance Law, there is no identified "wrongful expenditure, misappropriation, misapplication, or any other illegal or unconstitutional disbursement of state funds" sufficient to invoke same (State Finance Law § 123-b [1]; see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki , 100 NY2d 801, 813-814 [2003], cert denied 540 US 1017 [2003]; Schulz v Silver , 134 AD3d 1369 , 1371 [3d Dept 2015], appeal dismissed 27 NY3d 959 [2016], lv den

2025Aurora , 193 AD3d 207, 210-211 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 NY3d 908 [2021]). [FN3] To the extent that petitioner's argument may be construed as relying upon the State Finance Law, there is no identified "wrongful expenditure, misappropriation, misapplication, or any other illegal or unconstitutional disbursement of state funds" sufficient to invoke same (State Finance Law § 123-b [1]; see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki , 100 NY2d 801, 813-814 [2003], cert denied 540 US 1017 [2003]; Schulz v Silver , 134 AD3d 1369 , 1371 [3d Dept 2015], appeal dismissed 27 NY3d 959 [2016], lv den

2025Aurora , 193 AD3d 207, 210-211 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 NY3d 908 [2021]). [FN3] To the extent that petitioner's argument may be construed as relying upon the State Finance Law, there is no identified "wrongful expenditure, misappropriation, misapplication, or any other illegal or unconstitutional disbursement of state funds" sufficient to invoke same (State Finance Law § 123-b [1]; see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki , 100 NY2d 801, 813-814 [2003], cert denied 540 US 1017 [2003]; Schulz v Silver , 134 AD3d 1369 , 1371 [3d Dept 2015], appeal dismissed 27 NY3d 959 [2016], lv den

2025Aurora , 193 AD3d 207, 210-211 [3d Dept 2021], lv denied 37 NY3d 908 [2021]). [FN3] To the extent that petitioner's argument may be construed as relying upon the State Finance Law, there is no identified "wrongful expenditure, misappropriation, misapplication, or any other illegal or unconstitutional disbursement of state funds" sufficient to invoke same (State Finance Law § 123-b [1]; see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki , 100 NY2d 801, 813-814 [2003], cert denied 540 US 1017 [2003]; Schulz v Silver , 134 AD3d 1369 , 1371 [3d Dept 2015], appeal dismissed 27 NY3d 959 [2016], lv den

2024State law which has then been curtailed or taken away by the local law" ( Sunrise Check Cashing & Payroll Servs., Inc. v Town of Hempstead , 91 AD3d 126, 134 [internal quotation marks omitted], affd 20 NY3d 481 ).

2021For a local law to be invalid pursuant to the conflict preemption doctrine, the State must specifically permit the conduct the local law prohibits or provide “some other indication that deviation from state law is prohibited” (Garcia v New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene, 31 NY3d 601, 617-618 [2018] [internal quotation marks omitted]).

2011Solutions, Inc. v Sinclair, 2004 WL 764834 , 2004 US Dist LEXIS 6687 [ED PA 2004] [concluding that state laws regulating real estate appraisals do not target federal savings associations or national bank operations]). [1] The Dodd-Frank Act brought about a sea change in HOLA preemption: the Act provides that HOLA does not occupy the field in any area of law, and conforms the preemption standard applicable to FSAs to the conflict preemption standard for national banks delineated by the United States Supreme Court in Barnett Bank of Marion Cty., N. A. v Nelson ( 517 US 25, 31 [1996] [state laws

2011The Dodd-Frank Act brought about a sea change in HOLA preemption: the Act provides that HOLA does not occupy the field in any area of law, and conforms the preemption standard applicable to FSAs to the conflict preemption standard for national banks delineated by the United States Supreme Court in Barnett Bank of Marion Cty., N. A. v Nelson ( 517 US 25, 31 [1996] [state laws may be preempted where they are in “irreconcilable conflict” with federal statutes, which may occur where compliance with both laws is impossible, or where the state law is “an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution

2008Thus, the question before us is whether the Workers’ Compensation Law is preempted under the doctrine of conflict preemption—defined, as pertinent here, as a situation “ ‘where the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress’ ” (Balbuena v IDR Realty LLC, 6 NY3d 338, 356 [2006], quoting Ray v Atlantic Richfield Co., 435 US 151, 158 [1978]).

2008Thus, the question before us is whether the Workers’ Compensation Law is preempted under the doctrine of conflict preemption—defined, as pertinent here, as a situation “ ‘where the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress’ ” (Balbuena v IDR Realty LLC, 6 NY3d 338, 356 [2006], quoting Ray v Atlantic Richfield Co., 435 US 151, 158 [1978]).