New York Motion Word Limits: 7,000 and 4,200 Under 202.8-b, and What Rule 17 Still Counts
Short answer: 7,000 words in chief and 4,200 on reply under 22 NYCRR 202.8-b. Since July 7, 2025, witness affidavits no longer count. Commercial Division Rule 17 was not amended and still caps them at 7,000.
Two New York rules set the same numbers and then diverge on the question that decides compliance: does a 9,000 word expert affidavit count? Under section 202.8-b, after the amendment effective July 7, 2025, it does not. Under Commercial Division Rule 17, nothing in the text takes it out of the count. Most checklists online predate the amendment and treat the two rules as identical.
What is the word limit for a motion in New York Supreme Court?
Section 202.8-b now carries the heading “Length of Papers on a Motion Pursuant to CPLR 2214 or 2215,” which ties it expressly to notice of motion and cross-motion practice. Subdivision (a) applies “Where prepared by use of a computer, unless otherwise permitted by the court,” and caps “attorney affidavits or affirmations, and memoranda of law in chief” at “7,000 words each.” Reply papers get “no more than 4,200 words each.”
Two features matter. The cap is per document, not per motion, so a 6,800 word affirmation plus a 6,900 word memorandum complies. And the limit now reaches attorney affidavits and affirmations. The version in force until July 7, 2025 read “affidavits, affirmations, briefs and memoranda of law in chief shall be limited to 7,000 words each,” with no qualifier and no carve out.
Typewritten or handwritten papers are governed by subdivision (d), which is “limited to 20 pages each” in chief and “limited to 10 pages each” on reply. Subdivision (e) governs cross-motions. Subdivision (f) is the relief valve: “The court may, upon oral or letter application on notice to all parties permit the submission of affidavits, affirmations, briefs or memoranda which exceed the limitations set forth above.” Note the mechanics. It is an application on notice, not a footnote in your own brief announcing that you went long.
What changed on July 7, 2025?
The amended rule adds this sentence, and it appears in subdivisions (a), (d) and (e): “These word limitations shall not apply to evidentiary materials such as affidavits, affirmations or reports from lay or expert witnesses.” The Cornell page for the current version records the amendment as “Amended New York State Register May 28, 2025/Volume XLVII, Issue 21, eff. 7/7/2025.”
Three things are different. The heading names CPLR 2214 and 2215. The covered documents in (a) are attorney affidavits and affirmations, not affidavits generally. And a fact witness affidavit or expert report of any length sits outside the count, in all three subdivisions where length is fixed.
22 NYCRR 202.8-b and Commercial Division Rule 17, side by side
| Question | 22 NYCRR 202.8-b (eff. 7/7/2025) | Comm. Div. Rule 17, 22 NYCRR 202.70(g) | Where read |
|---|---|---|---|
| In chief | “attorney affidavits or affirmations, and memoranda of law in chief shall be limited to 7,000 words each” | “briefs or memoranda of law shall be limited to 7,000 words each” | nycourts.gov Part 202; nycourts.gov sec. 202.70 |
| Reply | “reply attorney affidavits, or affirmations, and memoranda of law shall be no more than 4,200 words each” | “reply memoranda shall be no more than 4,200 words and shall not contain any arguments that do not respond” | law.cornell.edu; nycourts.gov sec. 202.70 |
| Witness affidavits and expert reports | “These word limitations shall not apply to evidentiary materials such as affidavits, affirmations or reports from lay or expert witnesses.” | “affidavits and affirmations shall be limited to 7,000 words each” (no witness exception in the text) | law.cornell.edu and nycourts.gov, both versions |
| Excluded from the count | “the caption, table of contents, table of authorities, and signature block” | “the caption, table of contents, table of authorities, and signature block” | nycourts.gov Part 202; nycourts.gov sec. 202.70 |
| Typewritten papers | “limited to 20 pages each” in chief; “limited to 10 pages each” on reply | Not specified in Rule 17 as read today | nycourts.gov Part 202 |
| Certification | Required by subd. (c) for anything “prepared by use of a computer” | “Every brief, memorandum, affirmation, and affidavit shall include, on a page attached to the end of the applicable document, a certification by the counsel” | nycourts.gov Part 202; nycourts.gov sec. 202.70 |
| Relief to exceed | Subd. (f): “upon oral or letter application on notice to all parties” | Not stated in the Rule 17 text read today | nycourts.gov Part 202 |
| Last amended | Register May 28, 2025, Vol. XLVII, Issue 21, eff. 7/7/2025 | Register Aug. 22, 2018, Vol. XL, Issue 34, eff. 10/1/2018 | law.cornell.edu |
Does 202.8-b or Rule 17 control in the Commercial Division?
The preamble to 22 NYCRR 202.70(g) answers the framework question: “Unless these rules of practice for the Commercial Division provide specifically to the contrary, the rules of Part 202 also shall apply to the Commercial Division, except that Rules 7 through 15 shall supersede section 202.12 (Preliminary Conference) and Rules 16 through 24 shall supersede section 202.8 (Motion Procedure).”
Note that the supersession clause names section 202.8, and 202.8-b is a separate section. The operative clause is the first one: Part 202 applies unless a Commercial Division rule “provide[s] specifically to the contrary,” and Rule 17 provides specifically on length, including affidavits and affirmations. On the text as it stands, the conservative course in the Commercial Division is to treat Rule 17 as the limit and keep every affidavit and affirmation at or under 7,000 words. We identified no amendment extending the 2025 carve out to Rule 17, and we take no position on how a given justice resolves the overlap.
Certification of compliance: drafting ready text
Subdivision (c) requires “a certification by the counsel who has filed the document setting forth the number of words in the document and certifying that the document complies with the word count limit,” attached to the end of the document. Two obligations on one page: state the number, and certify compliance. A certificate giving only the number does not do what (c) asks.
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE PURSUANT TO 22 NYCRR 202.8-b
I, [NAME], an attorney duly admitted to practice before the courts of the
State of New York, certify as follows:
1. This [memorandum of law / attorney affirmation] was prepared by use of a
computer.
2. Exclusive of the caption, table of contents, table of authorities, and
signature block, this document contains ______ words, as counted by the
word-processing system used to prepare it.
3. This document therefore complies with the word count limit of [7,000 /
4,200] words set forth in 22 NYCRR 202.8-b(a)([i]/[ii]).
Dated: ____________, New York
______________, 20__
_______________________________
[NAME]For a Commercial Division filing, swap the authority line to 22 NYCRR 202.70(g), Rule 17, and add a paragraph for each affidavit or affirmation you are filing, because Rule 17 reaches those documents by their own terms. For the Southern and Eastern Districts, the certificate rides on Local Civil Rule 7.1(c) and the count must include footnotes.
Worked example: the same summary judgment package in three courts
Assume a defense summary judgment motion with four computer prepared documents: a memorandum of law at 7,412 words, an attorney affirmation at 3,180 words, a treating physician’s affidavit at 4,960 words, and a biomechanical engineer’s report at 9,240 words. Footnotes account for 640 words of the 7,412.
- Supreme Court, non Commercial Division, CPLR 2214 motion. The memorandum is over by 412 words against the 7,000 cap in 202.8-b(a). The affirmation is fine at 3,180. The physician’s affidavit and the engineer’s report are evidentiary materials from a lay or expert witness and are outside the limitation entirely, so 4,960 and 9,240 are irrelevant. One fix: cut 412 words, or apply under subdivision (f) on notice. The four excluded items in (b) are the caption, table of contents, table of authorities and signature block, so those 640 words of footnotes stay in the count.
- Commercial Division. Same 412 word overage on the memorandum. Now the engineer’s 9,240 word report is the bigger problem, because Rule 17 caps “affidavits and affirmations” at 7,000 words each and the text read today contains no witness exception. That is a 2,240 word cut, or a restructuring that moves narrative out of the affidavit and into exhibits.
- S.D.N.Y. or E.D.N.Y. Local Civil Rule 7.1(c) allows 8,750 words for a brief in support, so the 7,412 word memorandum clears it with 1,338 words to spare, footnotes included, since the exclusion list “do[es] include material contained in footnotes or endnotes.” Reply is capped at 3,500 words.
The same brief is non compliant in two New York courts and comfortable in a federal courthouse a few blocks away. Fix the word budget at the outline stage, not at the end.
New York, California and federal motion limits compared
California does not count words at the trial level. Rule of Court 3.1113(d) counts pages: “no opening or responding memorandum may exceed 15 pages,” rising to 20 for summary judgment, and “No reply or closing memorandum may exceed 10 pages.” Subdivision (g) supplies the consequence: an over length memorandum “must be filed and considered in the same manner as a late-filed paper,” which is a discretionary refusal to consider, not a clerk’s rejection. For the appellate comparison, see our piece on appellate brief word limits in California, New York and federal court.
In the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, the joint Local Civil Rules amended as of January 2, 2026 set 8,750 words for briefs in support and in response, “except for motions for reconsideration,” and 3,500 on reply. The exclusion list runs longer than New York state’s: “the caption, any index, table of contents, table of authorities, signature blocks, or any required certificates, but do include material contained in footnotes or endnotes.” We verified no individual judge’s standing order today, and many district judges cut the limit by individual practice, so check the assigned judge’s page before relying on 8,750.
Pre-filing checklist for New York motion papers
- Confirm the part. Commercial Division assignment changes which length rule you comply with.
- Confirm the vehicle. Section 202.8-b is titled for motions under CPLR 2214 or 2215. Read the assigned justice’s part rules on top of it.
- Run the count per document, not per motion. Each affidavit, affirmation and memorandum has its own ceiling.
- Subtract only the four named items: caption, table of contents, table of authorities, signature block. Footnotes count.
- Classify every affidavit. Attorney affirmation, or evidentiary material from a lay or expert witness? In Supreme Court that classification decides whether it counts at all; in the Commercial Division, cap it at 7,000 either way.
- Attach the certification to the end of each computer prepared document, stating the number and certifying compliance.
- If you need more room, make the application under 202.8-b(f) on notice to all parties before you file, not after.
- Check the record and authority cites. Length relief is discretionary; a fabricated citation is a worse and separate problem. See our record of what courts have done about AI hallucinated citations.
Related timing rules a New York motion also has to clear: the notice periods in CPLR 2214(b), including the 16 day demand and cross-motion service, and, on summary judgment, the 120 day outer limit in CPLR 3212(a). If you also practice in California, the separate statement format under CRC 3.1350 is the analogous formal trap there.
Drafting to the limit
LegalBriefsUSA drafts New York motion papers to the word limit that actually applies to your part, with the certification page attached and the count run against the four exclusions in 202.8-b(b) rather than a guess. If you are holding a 9,400 word memorandum due Monday in a Commercial Division part, the work is a structural cut, not a hunt for shorter adverbs, and that is a deliverable we quote on. Send the memorandum, the affidavits and the part rules and we return the compliant package. Our motion drafting scope and supervision page sets out the engagement.
Authorities cited
22 NYCRR 202.8-b, “Length of Papers on a Motion Pursuant to CPLR 2214 or 2215,” read in the Part 202 text at nycourts.gov and independently at law.cornell.edu, which labels the current version effective 7/7/2025 and records the amendment at New York State Register May 28, 2025, Volume XLVII, Issue 21. The superseded version was read at law.cornell.edu on the page labeled effective until 7/7/2025. Commercial Division Rule 17 and the subdivision (g) preamble of 22 NYCRR 202.70 were read at nycourts.gov and at law.cornell.edu, which records Rule 17 as amended at New York State Register August 22, 2018, Volume XL, Issue 34, effective October 1, 2018. California Rule of Court 3.1113(d) and (g) were read at courts.ca.gov. Joint Local Civil Rule 7.1(c) for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York was read in the joint local rules PDF at nysd.uscourts.gov bearing the January 2, 2026 amendment date. Left out for lack of verification today: the word and page figures inside 202.8-b(e) for cross-motions, which we describe only as governing cross-motions; the administrative order number behind the 2025 amendment; any individual part rule or standing order; any bankruptcy court length rule; and all case law, because we opened no opinion for this article. No disciplinary, malpractice or sanctions conclusion is drawn above; subdivision (f) relief and California’s late-filed-paper treatment are length questions only.
LegalBriefsUSA.com provides drafting and research support to licensed attorneys and law firms. This article is written for attorneys, is not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship.