New York Proposes Rate Hikes to Thwart Genealogical Research

Over the years I’ve written about the difficulties in obtaining copies of vital records from the State of New York. The only way to receive a copy is to print out and physically mail a request, remit $22, then wait a few years for Albany to send a copy.

My latest orders have not been fulfilled. One year for the Cummings and Grant orders; three years for the Sheehy order.

New York claims a backlog of over 10,000 orders and that fulfilling them is almost impossible.

New York was able to figure out how to open the envelopes and cash the checks within weeks.

I suggested making the records digitally available online, which is what is happening with New York City records.

New York has responded. Their solution is to raise fees.

Memorandum in Support of these changes to pertinent New York laws

It is puzzling why Part U- the genealogical section of the Memorandum in Support of the proposed changed is called "Digitize Genealogical Records." Why called digitize? What is being digitized?

Raising the fee from $30 to $45 is their solution to ending the backlog. This is the fee under Section 4174 of the Public Health Law. Is this for only certified copies, of which genealogical copies are not? The current fee is $22, not $30, according to the website of the New York State Department of Health. Is this wrong?

Genealogical copies of births, marriages, and deaths are $22 from New York State Department of Health.
The website should have a disclaimer that you will not receive anything.

Raising fees would do nothing to end the existing backlog; however, it would lessen the rate of growth of the backlog by discouraging people from requesting more records. What would really decrease the growth of the backlog would be printing a disclaimer, such as “Our staff will not fill your order, but they will cash your check. Donate $45 to the State of New York now.” The backlog will remain because the orders were not fulfilled.

Also proposed is a research fee of $50 per hour. I'm not clear on when this would be invoked. At present, no research is performed, as no orders are processed. How long could this research endure? For example, minimum research on the part of the New York State Department of Health would have clarified that the request for the death certificate of Edmond Sheehy (died 1893 in Amenia) was incorrectly transcribed in their index as Edward Sheeby. Ten years later and I am still waiting for the death certificate. That is a lot of time.

In comparison, I can retrieve over one hundred certificates from microfilm in an all-day session at the New Jersey State Archives.

Also nervy is changing the statute to dispense with the requirement to maintain indexes to save themselves money after fighting against the request of Reclaim the Records to release those indexes.

In contrast, New York City is digitizing and publishing online for free its vital record collection.

New Jersey began state-wide collection of births, marriages, and deaths in 1848. For thirty years, the information was entered into ledger books and is available on microfilm at the New Jersey State Archives, online at a Family History Center for free, or online at home but behind a paywall at Ancestry. Certificates from 1878 forward are obtainable in person at the Archives in Trenton with cut-offs of 1924 for births and later for marriages and deaths. Mail orders are $10 per certificate with a return time of a few weeks.

Florida costs $10 per certificate with a return time of two weeks- the last time I ordered. More recent years are available than in New Jersey.

If New York cannot copy these records and cannot do it for $10, something is wrong. Very wrong.

Please share this information online to let New York know that its war on genealogy and history is not acceptable.

PS- While we are on the topic, what is the processing time of Connecticut? $20 for a death certificate. Waiting 22 months and counting.

Obtaining Marriage and Divorce Records in New Jersey 1949

Divorce records are an integral part of uncovering the lives of those from past generations.

While researching an ancestor, I happened upon a newspaper article detailing a divorce. The information within this record could prove highly valuable in my pursuits of the family history. The involved parties shall not be named at this point.

I requested a copy of divorce proceedings (also called dissolution of marriage) from Hudson County, New Jersey, circa 1950. Divorces from the year 1949 forward are in the custody of the Superior Court of New Jersey.

Keep in mind that divorces were not a secret in the 1950s. The tea was spilled in the local newspapers, reading like gossip columns. Below are samples in The Jersey Journal from 1950 and 1960.

I emailed the Court. Records after 1948 used to be obtained by writing to an email address within the Superior Court. The return time was usually about one week. The packet arrived via email as a digitized PDF file.

Final Judgment of Divorce, 1952
Names redacted by me as part of an ongoing project.

This time, the response explained the new procedure of registering with JEDS, the Judiciary Electronic Document System. The process was easy enough. Within days, the Court responded via email that only the parties or the attorneys could be sent copies of the file.

The parties are dead. I don't know if either party had an attorney, never mind their names. They are probably dead, too.

The Court invoked a Rule from 2009, which limits public access to certain types of documents that might be found in some modern-day divorce files.

Nevermind that I have received electronic copies of divorce records since 2009. This was the first time I was denied access to an entire file.

Nevermind that the prohibited documents likely do not exist in a divorce file from 1950.

I filed a Freedom of Information Act request. Also denied.

Paper mail response denying my request to view divorce records from 1950 under the Freedom of Information Act.

The court Rule is below:

1:38-3 Court Records Excluded from Public Access

    The following court records are excluded from public access:

        (d) Records of Family Part Proceedings

(1) Family Case Information Statements required by R. 5:5-2, notices required by R. 5:5-10 including requisite financial, custody and parenting plans, Financial Statements in Summary Support Actions required by R. 5:5-3 including all attachments, and settlement agreements incorporated into judgments or orders in dissolution and non-dissolution actions, except for parties and their counsel of record;
(2) Confidential Litigant Information Sheets pursuant to R. 5:4-2(g) and Affidavits or Certifications of Insurance Coverage pursuant to R. 5:4-2(f), except for the filing party and his or her counsel of record;
(3) Medical, psychiatric, psychological, and alcohol and drug dependency records, reports, and evaluations in matters related to child support, child custody, or parenting time determinations;
(4) Documents, records and transcripts related to proceedings and hearings required by the Supreme Court pursuant to Doe v. Poritz, 142 N.J. 1, 39 (1995), or subsequent orders of the Court;
(5) Juvenile delinquency records and reports pursuant to R. 5:19- 2 and N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-60, except for parties and their counsel of record;
(6) Records of Juvenile Conference Committees to the extent provided under R. 5:25-1(e), except for parties and their counsel of record;
(7) Expunged juvenile records pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-62 f. and 2C:52-15;
(8) Sealed juvenile records pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-62;
(9) Domestic violence records and reports pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:25-33, except for parties and their counsel of record in the underlying domestic violence matter;
(10) Names and addresses of victims or alleged victims of domestic violence or sexual offenses;
(11) Records relating to child victims of sexual assault or abuse pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:82-46;
(12) Records relating to Division of Child Protection and Permanency proceedings held pursuant to R. 5:12;
(13) Child custody evaluations, parenting time and visitation plans, reports, and records pursuant to R. 5:8-4, R. 5:8-5, R. 5:8B, N.J.S.A. 9:2-1, or N.J.S.A. 9:2-3;
(14) Paternity records and reports, except for the final judgments or birth certificates pursuant to N.J.S.A. 9:17-42;
(15) Records and reports relating to child placement matters pursuant to R. 5:13-8(a);
(16) Adoption records and reports pursuant to N.J.S.A. 9:3-52;
(17) Records of hearings on the welfare or status of a child, to the extent provided under R. 5:3-2;
(18) Records related to applications for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) predicate orders.
(19) Records of adjudications of delinquency for offenses involving marijuana or hashish sealed pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:52-5.2;

(20) Records relating to actions to change the name of a minor.

Adopted July 16, 2009; effective September 1, 2009.

See njcourts.gov/attorneys/rules-of-court

Under the court's interpretation of this Rule, this record is forever locked away with no recourse to view it.

In my opinion, the Rule is misinterpreted. If all family court records are prohibited from public access, why does the Rule enumerate twenty types of records that are not public? Why not stop at Records of Family Part Proceedings? None of the forbidden categories are what I need, such as the Complaint, Answer, and Final Decree.

The Court still advertises on its website that records of the Family Division are "available for public inspection." Based on their correspondence with me, this is not true.

Divorce records earlier than 1949 can be found at the State Archives in Trenton.

Microfilm of index of matrimonial actions

Microfilm of dockets of combined cases in chancery court.
Divorces are intermingled with other types of actions. 

Divorcing parties found in the docket of the Chancery Court.
This couple, Prince of Hudson County, will be discussed in an upcoming article.

While divorce records from 1949 are prohibited, the marriage records from 1949 are now available at the Archives.

Eager to view the latest public records-
1949 marriages

Microfilm rolls containing marriage certificates from 1949

Marriage record of Peter Edmond Duryea (1925-1997) and
Mary Catherine Cosgrove (1929-1997).
December 3, 1949 in Ramsey, Bergen County, New Jersey.

Marriage record of Robert Charles Duryea (1924-1998) and 
Marion DeNora (1925-1990).
July 24, 1949 in Little Falls, Passaic County, New Jersey.

These certificates are on microfilm in order by certificate number. To find a certificate number, you can view the images of the index, which are alphabetical by the bride's surname. A digital search of the index is available via Ancestry's database, New Jersey, U.S., Marriage Index, 1901-2016.

Index of marriages in New Jersey for the year 1949

The marriage records from 1949 must be obtained in person at the Archives, not via mail or online. You can try requesting a copy from the Department of Health or by having someone perform in-person research on your behalf.

If you live in New Jersey, please write to your elected legislators in the New Jersey State Senate and Assembly to advocate for ease of access to these records.