On November 21, 2025, New York State Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law Senate Bill S8195, ushering in a significant clarification to CPLR 2106, which authorizes the use of unsworn (i.e., not notarized) affirmations in civil actions, akin to declarations in the federal system under 28 U.S.C. § 1746. The Bill was sponsored by New York State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal at the request of the Unified Court System.

Effective January 1, 2024, the New York legislature had amended CPLR 2106 to allow the use of affirmations by “any person” with the same force and effect as sworn, notarized affidavits, regardless of profession or where the person is located. That effected a sea change, as previously, only lawyers and certain medical professionals could submit unsworn affirmations with the same effect as a sworn, notarized affidavit in New York. Professor Patrick Connors of Albany Law School, a leading authority on New York civil procedure, characterized that prior amendment as “one of the most significant changes to the CPLR in the 21st century and will impact many areas of practice.” Patrick M. Connors, CPLR 2106 Amended To Permit Any Person To Submit Affirmation in Lieu of Affidavit, Law.com | New York L.J. (Feb. 28, 2024 at 10:00 A.M.), https:www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2024/02/28/cplr-2106-amended-to-permit-any-person-to-submit-affirmation-in-lieu-of-affidavit/. Under that prior amendment to CPLR 2106, it was clear that affirmations are acceptable for certain purposes, such as proof of service, motions, responses to interrogatories, and verifications for answers. 

But the amendment left unclear whether affirmations could replace notarized affidavits for other purposes, such as deposition transcripts and errata sheets, verifications for complaints and petitions, and responses to requests to admit. As the New York Senate explained in advancing the recent 2025 amendment, “[t]he scope of the [2024 amendment] was intended to be broad, but its precise contours remain ambiguous,” and this ambiguity resulted in situations where “a practitioner adopted one interpretation and a court made the opposite determination in the same matter.” NY State Senate Bill 2025-S8195.

To provide much-needed clarity, the 2025 amendment explicitly allows affirmations instead of notarized affidavits for responses to notices to admit, answers to interrogatories, verifications of pleadings, bills of particulars, and any other sworn statements. NY State Senate Bill 2025-S8195. Notably, the amendment to CPLR 2106 also clarifies that an affirmation may include statements based not only on personal knowledge, but also “on information and belief.” NY State Senate Bill 2025-S8195. This is a significant development, as it enables affiants, under penalty of perjury, to provide information that they believe to be true, even if it derives from secondary sources or is not known with absolute certainty. In practice, this change broadens the evidentiary utility of affirmations where direct knowledge is unavailable and may be particularly useful before the commencement of discovery. 

At the same time, the amendment preserves certain boundaries between affirmations and notarized affidavits. The amendment clarifies that affirmations cannot replace notarized affidavits for “a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified person other than a notary.” NY State Senate Bill 2025-S8195. Further, matrimonial agreements remain governed by the Domestic Relations Law, under which “matrimonial agreements must be acknowledged in the form of deed.” NY State Senate Bill 2025-S8195. But apart from these exceptions, CPLR 2106 now permits affirmations in lieu of notarized affidavits for all other purposes in a New York civil action. 

With this amendment, New York achieves greater clarity and consistency for courts and litigants, balancing streamlined civil procedures with safeguards around sensitive documents and proceedings. And by expressly allowing statements “on information and belief” in affirmations, the legislature has modernized sworn statement practice to reflect the realities of litigation, where all relevant facts are not always within the direct knowledge of the person signing.