New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. General Construction Law § 93 (2026)

Effect of repealing statute upon existing rights

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 93. Effect of repealing statute upon existing rights. The repeal of
a statute or part thereof shall not affect or impair any act done,
offense committed or right accruing, accrued or acquired, or liability,
penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred prior to the time such repeal
takes effect, but the same may be enjoyed, asserted, enforced,
prosecuted or inflicted, as fully and to the same extent as if such
repeal had not been effected.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 21 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: Ruth v. Elderwood At Amherst, 2022 NY Slip Op 05637 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ruth v. Elderwood At Amherst, 2022 NY Slip Op 05637 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022). “Therefore, "the ' extent of a party's liability, in the civil context as well as the criminal, is an important legal consequence' in determining retroactivity" ( Regina Metro. Co., LLC , 35 NY3d at 367).”

Whitehead v. Pine Haven Operating LLC, 2023 NY Slip Op 06180 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023). “There is also a statutory presumption against retroactivity in the case [*2]of legislation that repeals an earlier statute ( see General Construction Law § 93; People v Roper , 259 NY 635 , 635 [1932]).”

Holiday v. United States, 683 A.2d 61 (D.C. 1996). · cites it 2× “, the court emphasized that (1) the general savings statute had been adopted primarily to prevent abatement of prosecutions altogether when legislation imposing harsher punishments could not apply retroactively because of the ex post facto clause, id.”

People v. Behlog, 543 N.E.2d 69 (NY 1989). “Contrary to the People’s assertion, the "savings clauses” (General Construction Law §§ 93, 94 [allowing prosecution under repealed statutes if the criminal conduct occurred prior to the repeal]) do not affect the ameliorative amendment exception.”

People v. Shedrick, 489 N.E.2d 1290 (NY 1985). “(See, General Construction Law § 93; McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 391; cf.”

Kellogg v. Travis, 188 Misc. 2d 164 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2001). · cites it 2× “General Construction Law § 93 provides: “The repeal of a statute or part thereof shall not affect or impair any act done, offense committed or right accruing, accrued or acquired, or liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred prior to the time such repeal takes…”

Kellogg v. Travis, 796 N.E.2d 467 (NY 2003). “General Construction Law § 93 provides that “[t]he repeal of a statute or part thereof shall not aifect or impair any act done, offense committed or right accruing, accrued or acquired, or liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred prior to the time such repeal takes…”

Zagoreos v. Conklin, 109 A.D.2d 281 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985). “Whatever lingering effects the plan might have in other contexts, this outdated product of defunct legislation cannot now supersede zoning powers specifically granted a municipality by the Town Law, if indeed it ever could have done so.”

Cnty. of St. Lawrence v. Shah, 95 A.D.3d 1548 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). “General Construction Law § 93 provides that “[t]he repeal of a statute or part thereof shall not *1554 affect or impair any .”

Frontier Ins. v. State, 197 A.D.2d 177 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994). “v State of New York, 172 AD2d 13 ; see also, General Construction Law § 93). Next the State argues that the provisions of Public Officers Law § 17 (7) bar claimant’s claims.”

People v. Archer, 121 A.D.2d 730 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986). “In holding that the amended statute was not applicable to a defendant sentenced subsequent to the 1984 amendment for crimes committed before the law took effect, Justice Schneier stated, in pertinent part, as follows: "As a general rule, a statute is not retroactive (General…”

Foley v. Fitzpatrick Container Co., 267 A.D.2d 637 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999). “Indeed, the repeal of a statute does “not affect or impair any * * * right accruing, accrued or acquired * * * prior to the time such repeal takes effect, but the same may be enjoyed, asserted, enforced, prosecuted or inflicted, as fully and to the same extent as if such repeal…”

Show all 21 citing cases →

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.