Five judge panel rules in favor of Steuben County. Sheriff Allard, lawmakers react to conclusion of court battle
Read the full decision from the 4th Judicial Department
By Andrew Harris
After years in civil litigation, the matter of Allard v. Steuben County has come to a resolution. The NYS Appellate Court recently ruled in a 5-0 decision, to reverse the ruling by Supreme Court Judge Jason Cook in 2025 which found that the local laws passed by the county in 2023 must be repealed and the county must continue to indemnify the county sheriff.
Brief history of Allard v Steuben County
To back up a little bit, in 2023 Steuben County passed a law that would remove liability indemnification/insurance for the elected Sheriff. Steuben County Sheriff James Allard took legal action against the county to invalidate that local law due to “bad faith” and a flawed legislative process. Supreme Court Judge Cook agreed with Allard and ordered the county’s local law struck down and the Sheriff’s insurance re-instated.
The option to appeal that decision by Judge Cook allowed all defendants to individually decide to file an appeal, or accept the judgement. The Steuben County Legislature decided not to file an appeal. Jack Wheeler, Steuben County Manager also decided not to file an appeal. Steuben County Legislator Scott Van Etten, named as the Chairman of the Legislature at the time, chose to appeal with the Appellate Division 4th Department.
Read our full interview with Van Etten last year about his decision below:
That court reached a decision in late July 2026 which sided with the appeal in a unanimous decision. We asked Mr. Van Etten for his reaction to the ruling:
“The purpose of appealing Judge Cooks decision was to prove that Steuben County acted properly and according to NYS law to adopt a local law repealing the Sheriff’s indemnification that had been provided in a previous local law. The Appellate Court unanimously sided with the County, and reversed Judge Cooks’ decision. It was a vindication that, despite all of the misinformation that had been fed to the public, the County did nothing improper and was well within their right to adopt the local law.”
Sheriff Allard saved his public comment on the matter for a regular appearance on the “Frankly Speaking” show on Corning’s WYDC BIGFOX. Allard and host Frank Acomb have discussed the legal saga on a regular basis since the 2023 law was passed by Steuben County. When asked about the Appellate Court decision Allard had this to say to Acomb:
“Obviously the County appealed Justice Cook’s decision and it went to a appellate review and it was determined by them that Justice Cook’s case law that he used to overturn, they didn’t feel it was the correct case law. The didn’t negate the fact that it was done in bad faith, but what they did say was in order to overturn legally enacted legislation the bar is higher than just bad faith.”
Allard made it clear that the entire episode was a cost to both sides and he would “fight this fight again in a heartbeat,” but admitted to Acomb that,
“I don’t feel like anybody won. I think we all lost.”
Sheriff Allard did offer some encouraging thoughts now that the matter is largely resolved:
“I am very encouraged by the communication with the legislature, I feel ike the 2026 legislatures is very different than the 2023 and they realize it was bad policy and they want to rectify that and move forward….. I think we will continue to work together in a much better fashion.”
Watch the full interview from October 7th on “Frankly Speaking” here
Nobody is more ready to move on than Steuben County Chair Kelly Fitzpatrick as she noted last year, “It’s time to move on.”
We asked Fitzpatrick for her take on the resolution of the lawsuit, specifically if the county planned to reimburse the Sheriff for legal fees and reinstate the insurance coverage. The County Chair told the Sun,
“There is no legal mechanism for the County to use taxpayer funds to reimburse the Sheriff’s legal expenses. Therefore, we will not be doing so.”
She also clarified that the issue of renewing insurance for the Sheriff was not currently on the table but will be a conversation in the future.
Read the full decision by the 4th Judicial Department
