HousingHuman capitalPositive

Right to Counsel — NYC Eviction Court Legal Representation

NYC Office of Civil Justice / Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy · New York City, USA · 2017

Summary

The NYC right to counsel experiment revealed something that should not have been surprising: when 98% of landlords have attorneys and fewer than 1% of tenants do, the asymmetry determines outcomes far more than the merits of the case. When that asymmetry was corrected — by providing every qualifying tenant with a free lawyer — 84% of represented tenants avoided eviction, compared to roughly 50% in the unrepresented era. The program did not create rights that didn't exist; tenants already had legal defenses available to them. It simply provided the professional knowledge required to exercise those rights. The cost-benefit evidence made the program politically viable: preventing eviction is dramatically cheaper than sheltering the homeless people those evictions produce. The NYC experiment thus illustrates both a rights argument (access to courts is hollow without access to legal counsel) and a fiscal argument (prevention is cheaper than remediation) — a combination that explains its rapid spread.

Research question

"Does providing free legal representation to tenants facing eviction — in a court system where 98% of landlords have attorneys and fewer than 1% of tenants do — dramatically reduce eviction rates and housing instability?"

Methodology

Intervention

New York City enacted Local Law 136 in 2017, creating a right to free legal counsel for tenants facing eviction in Housing Court, phased in by zip code. Tenants in covered zip codes became entitled to full representation by a legal aid attorney. The phase-in by zip code creates a natural experiment: zip codes receiving the program at different times can be compared during the rollout period.

Assignment

Quasi-experimental with zip-code-level rollout design; Furman Center evaluations compare eviction outcomes in newly covered zip codes vs. not-yet-covered zip codes in the same time period; NYC Office of Civil Justice annual reports track program outcomes

Sample size

~50,000 tenant cases annually in NYC Housing Court; approximately 27,000 tenants represented in first year of full program operation

Primary outcome

Eviction rates (cases ending in eviction warrants); tenant representation rates; cases resolved without eviction (through negotiated agreements, case dismissal); housing stability

Effect estimate

Eviction warrants: fell 40% citywide from 2017 to 2019 as program expanded. Represented tenant outcomes: 84% of represented tenants avoided eviction (compared to historical ~50% eviction rate for unrepresented tenants). Representation rates: rose from under 1% to 38% of tenants citywide by 2019. Cost-benefit: city estimated savings of $320M in shelter costs vs. program cost of $166M, a ratio of nearly 2:1.

Decision

NYC's right-to-counsel law became a model for national legislation; as of 2024, Connecticut, Maryland, and Washington have enacted statewide right-to-counsel for eviction; 20+ cities and counties have adopted local versions; bipartisan support based on cost-effectiveness evidence (avoiding homelessness is cheaper than sheltering people who become homeless); National Coalition for a Civil Right to Counsel tracks legislation; COVID-era eviction moratoriums raised the salience of the underlying access-to-justice problem

Result

Positive

Eviction warrants: fell 40% citywide from 2017 to 2019 as program expanded. Represented tenant outcomes: 84% of represented tenants avoided eviction (compared to historical ~50% eviction rate for unrepresented tenants). Representation rates: rose from under 1% to 38% of tenants citywide by 2019. Cost-benefit: city estimated savings of $320M in shelter costs vs. program cost of $166M, a ratio of nearly 2:1.

Evidence strength

Moderate

Quasi-experimental design; causal interpretation requires care.

Replication status

Partially replicated

Institution

NYC Office of Civil Justice / Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy

Location

New York City, USA

Year

2017

Policy area

Housing

Mechanism

Human capital