This week, Eisenberg & Baum, LLP filed an amicus brief in the disability and labor rights case Andersen v. Roberts on behalf of fifteen organizations, led by Legal Services of Central New York. The underlying case, brought by the Empire Justice Center and later joined by the National Center for Law and Economic Justice, considers whether New Yorkers with disabilities have the same right to receive credit for work performed as a requirement of receiving public assistance that non-disabled people do.

Andrew Rozynski, David John Hommel, and Lucy Treishmann prepared the brief on behalf of the following organizations as amici:

• Legal Services of Central New York (LSCNY)
• The Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network (AWN)
• Cardozo Bet Tzedek Legal Services (CBTLS)
• Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY)
• Cornell Law School’s Veterans Law Practicum
• The Disability Rights Bar Association (DRBA)
• The Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)
• Disability Rights New York (DRNY)
• The Legal Aid Society
• The Legal Aid Society of Mid-New York Inc.
• Legal Assistance of Western New York, Inc. (LawNY)
• The National Homelessness Law Center (NHLC)
• The National Partnership for Women & Families
• New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG)
• The Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund (TLDEF)

In Summary

Fifteen organizations, led by Legal Services of Central New York, support the plaintiffs in the Andersen v. Roberts disability and labor rights case in New York. Eisenburg & Baum LLP wrote the amicus brief, accepted by the court on May 6, 2024.

The case questions whether New Yorkers with disabilities should receive equal credit for work done as part of public assistance requirements. Plaintiffs argue that the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (OTDA) unfairly denies credit for work hours to disabled individuals who later receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI), going against a 2015 ruling.

OTDA agreed to credit work for some public assistance recipients but hasn’t applied this to individuals with disabilities receiving SSI retroactively. Instead, OTDA demands repayment from the SSI award, violating the 2015 ruling.

The amicus brief argues that OTDA’s policy discriminates against people with disabilities and lacks a rational basis, further disadvantaged them economically.

The Andersen case appeal is set for May 28, 2024. LSCNY and other supporting organizations urge the court to uphold the ruling in favor of the plaintiffs.