N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Public Officers / ARTICLE Open Meetings Law
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Public Officers Law § 108 (2026)

Exemptions

✓ 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 
§ 108. Exemptions. Nothing contained in this article shall be
construed as extending the provisions hereof to:
  1. judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, except proceedings of the
public service commission and zoning boards of appeals;
  2. a. deliberations of political committees, conferences and caucuses.
  b. for purposes of this section, the deliberations of political
committees, conferences and caucuses means a private meeting of members
of the senate or assembly of the state of New York, or of the
legislative body of a county, city, town or village, who are members or
adherents of the same political party, without regard to (i) the subject
matter under discussion, including discussions of public business, (ii)
the majority or minority status of such political committees,
conferences and caucuses or (iii) whether such political committees,
conferences and caucuses invite staff or guests to participate in their
deliberations; and
  3. any matter made confidential by federal or state law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1989–2024 · leading case: New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms v. New York State Senate, 98 A.D.3d 285 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms v. New York State Senate, 98 A.D.3d 285 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). · cites it 4× ““[T]he provisions of the [OML] are to be liberally construed in accordance with the statute’s purposes” (Gordon, 87 NY2d at 127 ), and here we are called upon to construe the “guest” exemption, which is contained in Public Officers Law § 108 (2). 1 “The primary consideration of…”
Urban Just. Ctr. v. Pataki, 38 A.D.3d 20 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2006). “While the Open Meetings Law (Public Officers Law art 7) does mandate that “[e]very meeting of a public body shall be open to the general public” (Public Officers Law § 103 [a]), Public Officers Law § 108 (2) (a) expressly exempts “deliberations of political committees,…”
Humphrey v. Posluszny, 175 A.D.2d 587 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 1991). · cites it 2× “We reject respondents’ contention that the May 6, 1990 meeting was exempt from the requirements of the Public Officers Law, relating to open meetings, because that meeting constituted a "political caucus” of the Village of Lancaster Independent Party (see, Public Officers Law §…”
Greece Town Mall, L.P. v. New York State, 140 A.D.3d 1380 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2016). “of Appeals, 91 AD2d 763, 764 [1982]; see Public Officers Law § 108 [1]; Matter of Grossman v Planning Bd.”
Allen v. Cattaraugus Cnty. Bd. of Health, 4 Misc. 3d 383 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2004). “However, there was no violation of the Public Officers Law which, by its terms, does not apply to “quasi-judicial proceedings” (see Public Officers Law § 108 [1]; see also Matter of Concerned Citizens Against Crossgates v Town of Guilderland Zoning Bd.”
Lilly v. Lewiston-Porter Cent. Sch. Dist., 853 F. Supp. 2d 346 (W.D.N.Y. 2011). “Additionally, Public Officers Law § 108(1) exempts "quasi-judicial proceedings” from the open meeting requirement.”
Warren v. Giambra, 12 Misc. 3d 650 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “*654 Deliberations of political committees, conferences and caucuses are exempt from the Open Meetings Law when attended by members and adherents of the same political party and their staff and guests (Public Officers Law § 108 [2] [b]). The public interest is promoted by…”
Humphrey v. Posluszny, 148 Misc. 2d 848 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1990). · cites it 3× “Public Officers Law § 108 (2) (a) exempts the deliberations of political caucuses from the provisions of the Open Meetings Law.”
New Yorkers for Constitutional Free v. New York State Senate, No. CA 12-00313 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't July 6, 2012). · cites it 5× ““[T]he provisions of the [OML] are to be liberally construed in accordance with the statute’s purposes” (Gordon, 87 NY2d at 127 ), and here we are called upon to construe the “guest” exemption, which is contained in Public Officers Law § 108 (2).1 “The primary 1 Public Officers…”
Am. Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Bd. of Trs., 143 Misc. 2d 522 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1989). “First, because open meetings would lead to disclosure of confidential information which is prohibited by Federal statute ( 7 USC § 2157 ; Public Officers Law § 108 [3]). Second, public and legislative policy support the exclusion of research committees from open meetings law…”
New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms v. New York State Senate, 98 A.D.3d 285 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). · cites it 4× ““[T]he provisions of the [OML] are to be liberally construed in accordance with the statute’s purposes” (Gordon, 87 NY2d at 127 ), and here we are called upon to construe the “guest” exemption, which is contained in Public Officers Law § 108 (2). 1 “The primary consideration of…”
Matter of McCrory v. Vill. of Mamaroneck Bd. of Trs., 230 A.D.3d 786 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2024). · cites it 2× “However, the statute specifically exempts "[a]ny matter made confidential by federal or state law" (Public Officers Law § 108[3]). Insofar as communications made pursuant to an attorney-client relationship are confidential under the CPLR ( see id.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
N.Y. Public Officers Law § 108(1): 1 case
Lilly v. Lewiston-Porter Cent. Sch. Dist., 853 F. Supp. 2d 346 (W.D.N.Y. 2011). “Additionally, Public Officers Law § 108(1) exempts "quasi-judicial proceedings” from the open meeting requirement.”
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.