New York
New York Laws on Recording in Public: Rights, Limits, and Privacy Rules
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

In New York, you can generally photograph and video record in public spaces such as streets, parks, and sidewalks without a permit, and both New York's Right to Record Act and the First Amendment protect recording police doing their jobs in public. Audio recording follows the one-party consent rule: Penal Law 250.00 defines terms like wiretapping and mechanical overhearing, and Penal Law 250.05 makes unlawful eavesdropping a crime, together allowing you to record conversations you participate in without notifying others.
New York broadly protects the right to record in public. There is no general statute prohibiting recording in public, New York's Right to Record Act (Civil Rights Law 79-p) protects recording police, and the state's Open Meetings Law protects recording public meetings. New York's one-party consent law allows you to record conversations you participate in without telling other parties.
This guide covers your rights to record on public streets and in public buildings, the rules for recording at protests and demonstrations, the distinction between public and private property, commercial filming requirements, and the specific situations where recording in public can cross legal lines.
Your Right to Record in Public Spaces
Constitutional Protection
Recording in public places is generally lawful in New York because people have no reasonable expectation of privacy there. The clearest court rulings concern recording police. In August 2026 the Second Circuit, which covers New York, joined the other federal circuits that have ruled on the question and held that the First Amendment protects recording law enforcement activity in public, including recording a police station's exterior from a public sidewalk (Massimino v. Benoit, No. 25-1104). The officers in that case still received qualified immunity because the right was not clearly established when the 2018 arrest happened.

New York's Right to Record Act, Civil Rights Law 79-p, separately gives anyone who is not under arrest or in custody the right to record law enforcement activity, and lets a person sue an officer who unlawfully interferes with that recording. That right has a limit: in June 2026 New York's highest court held that neither this law nor New York City's Right to Record Act gives a right to video record inside the publicly accessible lobby of a police stationhouse, and in August 2026 the Second Circuit vacated the order that had blocked the NYPD's ban on recording inside its facilities (Reyes v. City of New York, No. 23-7640). In practice, you can generally:
- Taking photos and video on public streets, sidewalks, and plazas
- Filming public buildings, bridges, and landmarks from public property
- Recording events visible from public vantage points
- Livestreaming activity in public spaces
- Photographing people in public (though use of the images for commercial purposes may require consent)
New York Civil Rights Law
New York Civil Rights Law provides additional protections related to recording and privacy. While Sections 50 and 51 of the Civil Rights Law restrict the use of a person's name, portrait, or picture for advertising or trade purposes without consent, these provisions do not prevent you from recording in public for personal, journalistic, or educational purposes.
What You Can Record in Public
In public spaces in New York, you can legally:
- Film people, buildings, vehicles, and events visible from public property
- Record police officers, fire fighters, and other government officials performing their duties
- Film protests, demonstrations, marches, and rallies
- Record street performances, public art, and outdoor events
- Take photos of storefronts, buildings, and street scenes
- Record your own conversations with people in public under one-party consent
- Film from your own property or from any place where you have a lawful right to be
Recording at Protests and Demonstrations

Protections for Recording at Protests
Recording a protest from a public place is generally lawful, and recording the police response is protected by the First Amendment and New York's Right to Record Act. In New York, you can:
- Film a protest from the sidewalk, street, or other public area
- Record both the protesters and the police response
- Livestream protest activity in real time
- Photograph signs, banners, and other protest materials
Limitations During Protests
While recording at protests is protected, you must still follow general laws:
- Do not block traffic, emergency vehicles, or pedestrian access
- Follow lawful police orders to disperse or move to a specific area (note: an order to stop recording, on its own, is not lawful)
- Do not trespass on private property to record
- Stay behind police barricades when they have been lawfully established
- Do not physically interfere with police operations or arrest procedures
Protest Recording and Police Interactions
If police attempt to prevent you from recording a protest, assert your First Amendment rights calmly. New York's Right to Record Act (Civil Rights Law 79-p) lets you sue an officer who interferes with your recording, including by unlawfully seizing your phone or destroying your footage. Under Riley v. California (2014), police generally need a warrant to search the contents of your phone, although they may hold the phone while they get one. If your rights are violated, document the officer's badge number and file a complaint with the appropriate oversight body.
Recording on Private Property Open to the Public

The Distinction Between Public and Private
Many spaces that feel "public" are actually private property. Shopping malls, restaurants, retail stores, movie theaters, and office building lobbies are privately owned, even though the public is invited in. The property owner or operator controls recording on their premises.
Business and Property Owner Rights
A private property owner can:
- Prohibit all photography and video recording on their premises
- Set specific conditions for recording (no flash photography, no tripods, etc.)
- Ask you to stop recording and leave if you refuse
- Call police to enforce a trespassing charge if you refuse to leave after being asked
However, a property owner cannot confiscate your device or force you to delete recordings. If you comply with a request to leave, the recording you already made remains yours.
Common Semi-Public Locations
| Location | Can You Record? |
|---|---|
| Public sidewalk | Yes, freely |
| Public park | Yes, freely |
| Shopping mall interior | Owner can restrict |
| Restaurant dining area | Owner can restrict |
| Retail store | Owner can restrict |
| Museum or gallery | Usually restricted by policy |
| Theater or concert venue | Usually prohibited by policy |
| Hotel lobby | Owner can restrict |
| Office building lobby | Owner can restrict |
| Public library | Generally permitted; check local policy |
Recording Government Proceedings

Open Meetings Law
The New York Open Meetings Law (Public Officers Law Sections 100 through 111) requires that meetings of public bodies be open to the public. Recording of open meetings is generally permitted. This includes:
- City council meetings
- County legislature sessions
- School board meetings
- Town board meetings
- Public hearings and committee meetings
- State legislative proceedings open to the public
Government bodies can adopt reasonable rules about the placement of recording equipment (camera placement, tripod positioning, lighting) but generally cannot prohibit recording altogether.
Court Proceedings
New York courtrooms have traditionally restricted or prohibited recording. Civil Rights Law 52 makes it a misdemeanor to televise, broadcast, or take motion pictures of a proceeding in which a court, commission, or tribunal takes witness testimony under subpoena or other compulsory process, subject to narrow exceptions (Public Service Commission rate hearings, and legislative hearings where testimony is given voluntarily) that require the presiding officer's consent, each witness's written consent, and a finding that broadcast serves the public interest. Outside those exceptions, cameras and recording devices remain generally prohibited in New York state courtrooms unless specifically authorized by the presiding judge.
Federal courts in New York also generally prohibit cameras in the courtroom, following the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and local rules of the individual district courts.
Public Transportation
MTA Subways, Buses, and Stations
Recording on New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) system is generally permitted. The MTA does not prohibit personal photography or non-commercial video recording on its platforms, in its stations, or on its vehicles. You can:
- Take photos on subway platforms and in stations
- Record video on buses and subway cars
- Photograph MTA infrastructure and signage
Commercial filming (for advertisements, movies, or television) requires a permit from the MTA or the relevant city agency.
Commuter Rail and Amtrak
Metro-North, Long Island Rail Road, and Amtrak generally permit personal photography and video recording. Commercial filming typically requires advance permission.
Audio Recording in Public
One-Party Consent in Public Settings
New York's one-party consent law (Penal Law 250.05, which draws on the definitions in Penal Law 250.00) applies to audio recording in public just as it does in private settings. As a participant in a conversation, you can record without telling the other person.
New York's eavesdropping law does not turn on where a conversation happens. Using a device to record a conversation you are not part of and are not present at, without the consent of at least one participant, is mechanical overhearing under Penal Law 250.00 and can be eavesdropping, a class E felony, under Penal Law 250.05, even in a public place.
Recording Other People's Conversations in Public
While you can record your own conversations in public, recording conversations between other people that you are not part of raises eavesdropping concerns. Even in public, if people are speaking privately (whispering, speaking at a distance from others), intercepting their conversation with a directional microphone or hidden recording device could constitute mechanical overhearing under the eavesdropping statute.
Commercial Filming and Photography
When a Permit Is Required
New York City requires permits for commercial filming and photography in most situations. The Mayor's Office of Media and Entertainment (MOME) issues permits for:
- Film and television production on city streets
- Commercial photo shoots in public spaces
- Advertising and marketing photography
- Any production using equipment that requires exclusive use of city property
When a Permit Is Not Required
You generally do not need a permit for:
- Personal photography and video (vacation photos, social media content)
- News gathering and journalism
- Documentary filming in public without exclusive use of public property
- Student projects (some exceptions may apply)
- Recording with handheld devices that do not obstruct public access
Right of Publicity Considerations
New York Civil Rights Law Sections 50 and 51 protect an individual's right of publicity. While you can freely photograph or record people in public, using someone's image for commercial purposes (advertising, product promotion, trade use) without their written consent can result in civil liability. This does not apply to newsworthy, educational, or artistic uses.
Recording and Privacy: Where Public Ends
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
Even in public spaces, some situations carry a reasonable expectation of privacy that limits recording:
- Public restrooms and changing facilities
- Hospital emergency rooms and medical treatment areas
- Private conversations conducted in a secluded manner, even in a public setting
- Certain areas of government buildings (secure zones, chambers, holding areas)
Harassment Through Recording
While recording in public is legal, New York's harassment and stalking laws can apply if recording is used as a tool for harassment:
- Repeatedly following and recording someone after being asked to stop could support a harassment charge under Penal Law 240.26
- Using recordings to stalk or intimidate someone may violate New York's stalking statutes (Penal Law 120.45 through 120.60)
- New York does not recognize a common-law privacy claim for intrusion upon seclusion (Howell v. New York Post Co., 1993), so persistent, targeted recording of a person in public is usually addressed through a harassment or stalking complaint and a request for an order of protection, rather than a privacy lawsuit
Drones and Aerial Recording in Public
Using drones for aerial photography and video in New York is subject to both state law and FAA regulations. While New York does not have a comprehensive drone privacy statute, practical limitations include:
- New York City generally prohibits drone operation under local administrative code, with limited exceptions for commercial operators with proper FAA authorization
- FAA regulations require drone registration, remote pilot certification for commercial use, and compliance with airspace restrictions
- Using a drone to record someone in a private space could constitute unlawful surveillance under Penal Law 250.45
More New York Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording
Back to New York Recording Laws
More New York Recording Topics
More New York Laws
- New York AI Meeting Recording Laws
- New York Dashcam Laws
- New York Data Privacy Laws
- New York Deepfake Laws
- New York Employee Monitoring Laws
- New York GPS Tracking Laws
- New York Police Bodycam Laws
- New York Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to record video in public in New York?
Yes. Recording video in public spaces in New York is generally legal, and the First Amendment and New York's Right to Record Act protect recording police doing their jobs in public. You can film on streets, sidewalks, parks, and other public areas without a permit for non-commercial purposes. You do not need consent from people you film in public spaces, though using their images for commercial purposes may require permission.
Can a store in New York tell me to stop recording?
Yes. Stores and other businesses are private property, even though the public is invited in. The owner or manager can prohibit recording and ask you to leave if you refuse. However, they cannot confiscate your device or force you to delete recordings. If you refuse to leave after being asked, you could face a trespassing charge.
Can I record a government meeting in New York?
Yes. New York Open Meetings Law requires most meetings of public bodies to be open to the public, and recording is generally permitted. Government bodies can set reasonable rules about camera placement and equipment but cannot prohibit recording of open meetings altogether.
Do I need a permit to film on the street in New York City?
For personal, non-commercial recording with a handheld device, no permit is required. For commercial filming, advertising photography, or productions that require exclusive use of public property or use of equipment like tripods, lighting, or generators, a permit from the Mayor's Office of Media and Entertainment is required.
Can I record someone who asks me to stop in a public place in New York?
Generally, yes. In a public place, you have a right to record what is visible and audible. Someone cannot legally compel you to stop recording in a public space simply because they do not want to be filmed. However, if you follow or target a specific person repeatedly with recording after being asked to stop, this could cross into harassment territory under New York Penal Law.
Updates
We narrowed broad statements about public recording to what each law actually protects and added that, under 2026 rulings in Reyes v. City of New York, New York's Right to Record laws do not give a right to film inside a police station's public lobby.
Corrected the police-seizure rule (police need a warrant to search a phone, not to hold it), removed an intrusion-upon-seclusion claim New York does not recognize, added New York's Right to Record Act and the Second Circuit's August 2026 ruling on recording police, and fixed the explanation of when recording others' conversations in public is eavesdropping.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected a mismatched bill citation in the courtroom-recording section (the cited bill actually concerns police body-camera tampering, not courtroom cameras) and replaced it with New York's actual courtroom-broadcast rule under Civil Rights Law 52; also fixed the one-party consent statute citation to point to the offense section (Penal Law 250.05) rather than the definitions section (250.00) alone.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
New York Penal Law
§ 250.05EavesdroppingIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
Eavesdropping. A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in wiretapping, mechanical overhearing of a conversation, or intercepting or accessing of an electronic communication. Eavesdropping is a class E felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-24 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 39 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):New York courts recognize a vicarious consent exception to the eavesdropping offense. The Appellate Term adopted it in People v. Clark (2008). The Court of Appeals then held in People v. Badalamenti (2016) that consent covers a parent with a good faith, objectively reasonable belief that recording serves the child's best interests.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- The People v. Anthony Badalamenti (New York Court of Appeals 2016, 27 N.Y.3d 423)✓A father's call to the mother's phone connected with no one speaking, and he recorded her boyfriend threatening to beat his five year old son; the court held that consent under Penal Law 250.05 includes a parent's vicarious consent, so the recording was admissible.
- People v. Badalamenti (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2015, 124 A.D.3d 672)✓Reviewing the same recording of a boyfriend threatening the father's young son, the Appellate Division adopted a vicarious consent exemption to Penal Law 250.05 where a parent has a good faith, objectively reasonable basis to believe recording serves the child's welfare.
- People v. Clark (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2008, 19 Misc. 3d 6)✓A mother slipped an audio recorder into the backpack of her nonverbal autistic eight year old before he boarded the school bus, capturing his bus matron; the Appellate Term held she could vicariously consent for him, so the recording did not violate Penal Law 250.05.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Smart Glasses Recording Laws 2026, New York Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, New York Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties
§ 240.26Harassment in the second degreeIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Harassment in the second degree. A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person: 1. He or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same; or 2. He or she follows a person in or about a public place or places; or 3. He or she engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no legitimate purpose. Subdivisions two and three of this section shall not apply to activities regulated by the national labor relations act, as amended, the railway labor act, as amended, or the federal employment labor management act, as amended. Harassment in the second degree is a violation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 1,060 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Sylla (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2005, 7 Misc. 3d 8)“…e (Penal Law § 120.15) and harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [1]). Defendant did not challenge the s…”
- The People v. Kaity Marshall (New York Court of Appeals 2015, 26 N.Y.3d 495)“…aw §§ 120.14, 120.15), and Harassment in the Second Degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [1]). Eighteen months after the bu…”
- People v. Payton (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1994, 161 Misc. 2d 170)“…uct” is not specifically defined in the Penal Law. However, Penal Law § 240.26 (3), harassment in the second degree (P…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Assault Laws: Degrees, Felonies and Penalties (2026)
§ 250.00Eavesdropping; definitions of termsIn forcecited in 20 of our articles
Eavesdropping; definitions of terms. The following definitions are applicable to this article: 1. "Wiretapping" means the intentional overhearing or recording of a telephonic or telegraphic communication by a person other than a sender or receiver thereof, without the consent of either the sender or receiver, by means of any instrument, device or equipment. The normal operation of a telephone or telegraph corporation and the normal use of the services and facilities furnished by such corporation pursuant to its tariffs or necessary to protect the rights or property of said corporation shall not be deemed "wiretapping." 2. "Mechanical overhearing of a conversation" means the intentional overhearing or recording of a conversation or discussion, without the consent of at least one party thereto, by a person not present thereat, by means of any instrument, device or equipment. 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 56 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Fata (New York County Courts 1988, 139 Misc. 2d 979)“…Fata had a justifiable expectation of privacy; and (c) that Penal Law § 250.00 et seq. prohibit the mechanical overh…”
- The People v. Anthony Badalamenti (New York Court of Appeals 2016, 27 N.Y.3d 423)“…t of “mechanical overhearing of a conversation” pursuant to Penal Law § 250.00 (2), includes vicarious consent, on beh…”
- Gurevich v. Gurevich (New York Supreme Court 2009, 24 Misc. 3d 808)“…11 ing” as they relate to Penal Law § 250.05 are defined in Penal Law § 250.00 (6) as: “the intentional acquiring, r…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, New York Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Rights for Renters and Property Owners, New York Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and Healthcare Privacy
§ 250.45Unlawful surveillance in the second degreeIn forcecited in 19 of our articles
Unlawful surveillance in the second degree. A person is guilty of unlawful surveillance in the second degree when: 1. For his or her own, or another person's amusement, entertainment, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing a person, he or she intentionally uses or installs, or permits the utilization or installation of an imaging device to surreptitiously view, broadcast or record a person dressing or undressing or the sexual or other intimate parts of such person at a place and time when such person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without such person's knowledge or consent; or 2. For his or her own, or another person's sexual arousal or sexual gratification, he or she intentionally uses or installs, or permits the utilization or installation of an imaging device to surreptitiously view, broadcast or record a person dressing or undressing or the sexual or other intimate parts of such person at a place and time when such person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without such person's knowledge or consent; or 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 51 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):People v. Piznarski (2013) held Penal Law 250.45 reaches a participant who secretly records consensual sex, that the victim kept a reasonable expectation of privacy, and that the one-party consent rule for eavesdropping does not apply. People v. Evans (2006) applied section 250.45(3) to a camera hidden in a bedroom.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Evans (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2006, 27 A.D.3d 905)✓A man placed a video camera in his girlfriend's 12-year-old daughter's bedroom and recorded her undressing, then pleaded guilty under Section 250.45(3); the court affirmed, holding the plea needed no express admission of no legitimate purpose given the statutory presumption.
- People v. Lema (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2017, 152 A.D.3d 440)✓A man used a phone camera to record under women's skirts on a subway train, but dark lighting produced no image of intimate parts; the court affirmed, holding Section 250.45(4) is satisfied when a device is used for the purpose of making such a recording.
- People v. Piznarski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2013, 113 A.D.3d 166)✓A student secretly recorded sex with two women using a camera left in view on his bedroom desk; the court affirmed under Section 250.45, holding the statute reaches a participant who records a consensual encounter and that a visible camera can still be used surreptitiously.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Is It Illegal to Video Record Someone Without Their Consent? (2026), New York School Recording Laws: Student, Parent, and Teacher Rights, New York Security Camera Laws: Rules for Homes, Businesses, and Rentals
New York Civil Rights Law
§ 52Televising, broadcasting or taking motion pictures of certain proceedings prohibitedIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Televising, broadcasting or taking motion pictures of certain proceedings prohibited. No person, firm, association or corporation shall televise, broadcast, take motion pictures or arrange for the televising, broadcasting, or taking of motion pictures within this state of proceedings, in which the testimony of witnesses by subpoena or other compulsory process is or may be taken, conducted by a court, commission, committee, administrative agency or other tribunal in this state; except that the prohibition contained in this section shall not apply to public hearings conducted by the public service commission with regard to rates charged by utilities, or to proceedings by either house of the state legislature or committee or joint committee of the legislature or by a temporary state commission which includes members of the legislature, so long as any testimony of witnesses which is taken is taken without resort to subpoena or other compulsory process, if (1) the consent of the temporary president of the senate or the speaker of the assembly, in the case of the respective houses of the state legislature, or the chairman, in the case of such a committee or commission, and a majority of…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 24 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Courtroom Television Network LLC v. State (New York Court of Appeals 2005, 5 N.Y.3d 222)“…rney of New York County seeking a declaratory judgment that Civil Rights Law § 52 is unconstitutional and enjoining the p…”
- Heckstall v. McGrath (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2005, 15 A.D.3d 824)“…coverage of petitioner’s trial, narrowly interpreting *825 Civil Rights Law § 52 as precluding audiovisual coverage only…”
- Clear Channel Communications, Inc. v. Rosen (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 1999, 263 A.D.2d 663)“…nty Court on March 10, 1999. They sought a declaration that Civil Rights Law § 52 was violative of the State Constitution…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Bans Smart Glasses From Every State Courthouse
United States Code Title 42
§ 1983Civil action for deprivation of rightsIn forcecited in 52 of our articles
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-16 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 282,365 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal (Supreme Court of the United States 2009, 556 U.S. 662)“…its brought against state officials under Rev. Stat. §1979, 42 U. S. C. §1983.” Hartman, 547 U. S., at 254, n. 2. Cf.…”
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of Catrett (Supreme Court of the United States 1986, 477 U.S. 317)“…policeman as she left. Petitioner brought an action under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 claiming that the refusal of service a…”
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs. (Supreme Court of the United States 1978, 436 U.S. 658)“…decided less than two decades ago. Focusing new light on 42 U. S. C. § 1983 , that decision widened access to the f…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: 11th Circuit Voids Notice Before Eviction Deposit Forfeiture, Florida Man Sues Police Over Facial Recognition Arrest (2026), Tenth Circuit Affirms Club Q Dismissals Under Colorado's CPLA
Sources and References
- N.Y. Penal Law 250.00 - Eavesdropping Definitions(nysenate.gov).gov
- N.Y. Penal Law 250.45 - Unlawful Surveillance(nysenate.gov).gov
- New York Open Meetings Law(dos.ny.gov).gov
- N.Y. Civil Rights Law 52 - Televising, Broadcasting or Taking Motion Pictures of Certain Proceedings Prohibited(nysenate.gov).gov
- N.Y. Penal Law 240.26 - Harassment(nysenate.gov).gov
- N.Y. Civil Rights Law Article 5(law.justia.com)
- 42 U.S.C. 1983 - Civil Rights Claims(law.cornell.edu)
- N.Y. Civil Rights Law 79-p - Right to Record Law Enforcement Activity(nysenate.gov).gov
- Massimino v. Benoit, No. 25-1104 (2d Cir. Aug. 17, 2026)(ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov).gov