N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Correction / ARTICLE Department of Corrections and Community Supervision
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Correction Law § 24 (2026)

Civil actions against department personnel

✓ text as retrieved May 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 24. Civil actions against department personnel. 1. No civil action
shall be brought in any court of the state, except by the attorney
general on behalf of the state, against any officer or employee of the
department, which for purposes of this section shall include members of
the state board of parole, in his or her personal capacity, for damages
arising out of any act done or the failure to perform any act within the
scope of the employment and in the discharge of the duties by such
officer or employee.
  2. Any claim for damages arising out of any act done or the failure to
perform any act within the scope of the employment and in the discharge
of the duties of any officer or employee of the department shall be
brought and maintained in the court of claims as a claim against the
state.
  3. This section shall apply with respect to claims arising on or after
the effective date of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 118 cases (56 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Arteaga v. State of New York, 527 N.E.2d 1194 (N.Y. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Arteaga v. State of New York, 527 N.E.2d 1194 (N.Y. 1988). · cites it 14× “These same considerations do not exist for police officers who ordinarily have neither the duty nor the authority to exert control or discipline over the people in society at large, where the right of the individual to be free from unwarranted police regulation and interference…”
Haywood v. Drown, 881 N.E.2d 180 (N.Y. 2007). · cites it 32× “[4] The defendants in both actions, represented by the Office of the Attorney General pursuant to Public Officers Law § 17, moved to dismiss the complaints on the ground that plaintiff's claims—both state and federal—were barred by Correction Law § 24. This statute provides, in…”
Ficklin v. Rusinko, 351 F. Supp. 3d 436 (W.D.N.Y. 2019). · cites it 10× “N.Y. Correct. Law § 24 (1). 1 Section 24(2)"requires that state law claims for damages against corrections officers 'shall be brought .”
Woodward v. State, 23 A.D.3d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2005). · cites it 14× “Plaintiff appeals only the most recent order, 1 contesting Supreme Court’s dismissal of the portions of his 42 USC § 1983 causes of action seeking damages from defendants in their personal capacities as precluded by Correction Law § 24. 2 Plaintiff argues that Correction Law §…”
Cruz v. New York, 24 F. Supp. 3d 299 (W.D.N.Y. 2014). · cites it 8× “in his or her personal capacity, for damages arising out of any act done or the failure to perform any act within the scope of the employment and in the discharge of the duties by such officer or employee.”
Haywood v. Drown, 556 U.S. 729 (2009). · cites it 2× “3, Correction Law §24 is effectively an immunity statute cloaked in jurisdictional garb.”
Cepeda v. Coughlin, 128 A.D.2d 995 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 1987). · cites it 5× “Correction Law § 24 provides in pertinent part: *996 "1.”
Barrington v. New York, 806 F. Supp. 2d 730 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). · cites it 4× “” N.Y. Correct. Law § 24 (2). Accordingly, under New York law applicable at the time that Barrington filed the prior action, Barrington had no choice but to proceed in the Court of Claims against the officers in their official capacities, that is, against the State.”
Plair v. City of New York, 789 F. Supp. 2d 459 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). · cites it 2× “” N.Y. Correct. Law § 24 (McKinney’s 2010).”
Davis v. McCready, 283 F. Supp. 3d 108 (S.D. Ill. 2017). “N.Y. Corr. Law § 24 (1) & (2). Courts in the Second Circuit have long held that Section 24 precludes a plaintiff from raising state law claims in federal court against state employees in their personal capacities for actions arising within the scope of their employment.”
Ismail v. Singh, 3 Misc. 3d 188 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003). · cites it 13× “Correction Law § 24 provides in pertinent part: “1.”
Degrafinreid v. Ricks, 417 F. Supp. 2d 403 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). · cites it 2× “Asserting that the Defendants cannot be held liable in their individual capacities pursuant to New York State Corrections Law § 24 (hereinafter, “Corrections Law § 24”), Defendants argue that plaintiffs state law negligence claims must be dismissed.”
Show all 118 citing cases →
N.Y. Correction Law § 24(1): 2 cases
Degrafinreid v. Ricks, 417 F. Supp. 2d 403 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). “Asserting that the Defendants cannot be held liable in their individual capacities pursuant to New York State Corrections Law § 24 (hereinafter, “Corrections Law § 24”), Defendants argue that plaintiffs state law negligence claims must be dismissed.”
Grubbs v. Ngbodi, No. 7:21-cv-02906 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2022).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.