Article

Second Circuit Rejects Qualified Immunity Challenge to Case Against DOCCS Officials

On April 4, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an important ruling in favor of firm client Michael Matzell, rejecting an attempt by New York State prison officials to claim qualified immunity from Mr. Matzell’s federal civil rights case.

Mr. Matzell filed the lawsuit in 2020 on behalf of himself and a class of individuals who were denied participation in the Shock Incarceration Program (“Shock”) while they were incarcerated by the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”), even though their participation was court-ordered. Mr. Matzell’s sentence included Shock, pursuant to New York State’s Drug Law Reform Act of 2009 (“DLRA”), which gave sentencing judges the authority to order Shock participation.

The Second Circuit denied the DOCCS officials’ bid to dismiss Mr. Matzell’s lawsuit. It held that DOCCS officials “exceeded and abused their governmental authority by ignoring the Court’s sentencing order and the DLRA’s plain statutory language.” It also found that “Matzell plausibly alleged that Defendants’ actions rose to the level of deliberate indifference in violation of his substantive due process rights” and that “Matzell plausibly alleged that Defendants’ actions were egregious, shocking to the conscience, and unreasonable.”

By ignoring court orders, DOCCS officials acted outside the bounds of their legal authority. They also denied Mr. Matzell and others the benefits of Shock, including early release from prison, as well as substance abuse treatment, therapy, education, and other reintegration services. DOCCS caused Mr. Matzell to serve an additional 506 days in prison that he would not have had to serve if he had been rightfully enrolled in Shock.

ECBAWM partner Debra L. Greenberger argued the case before the Second Circuit. She was joined on the brief by Katherine R. Rosenfeld and Vivake Prasad.

 

Article

19 ECBAWM Attorneys Named to 2023 Super Lawyers Lists

The firm is pleased to announce that 18 of its attorneys have been named to the 2023 Super Lawyers lists.

Firm partners Jonathan S. AbadyMatthew D. BrinckerhoffAndrew G. Celli, Jr.Richard D. EmeryDebra L. GreenbergerDaniel J. Kornstein, Julia P. Kuan, Hal R. LiebermanIlann M. MaazelZoe SalzmanSam ShapiroEarl S. Ward, and O. Andrew F. Wilson were named 2023 Super Lawyers.

Associates David BermanNick BourlandAndrew JondahlVivake Prasad, Max Selver, and Emily Wanger were named 2023 Super Lawyers Rising Stars.

The Super Lawyers list is issued by Thomson Reuters. A description of the selection methodology can be found on the Super Lawyers website.

Article

ECBAWM Reaches Class Settlement with NYC for 72,000+ People in Delayed Bail Release Case

ECBAWM has reached a major class action settlement with the City of New York for people detained by the City Department of Corrections who experienced delays in their release after paying bail. The City has agreed to pay $3,500 per instance of delayed bail release; over 72,000 people may be eligible for a settlement payment. The settlement needs to be approved by the Court after a fairness hearing.

The case is called Jones v. City of New York and was filed in 2017 in federal court in the Southern District of New York. Class Counsel are ECBAWM (Matthew D. Brinckerhoff, Debra L. Greenberger, and Vasudha Talla), Julia Kuan of Romano & Kuan PLLC, and David Lebowitz of Kaufman Lieb Lebowitz & Frick. The NY Times, CBSNews, the Daily News, Bloomberg, and WNYC reported on this settlement.

Further information about the settlement is available at www.NYCBailSettlement.com. If you were released on bail from DOC custody between October 4, 2014 and October 21, 2022, and reasonably believe that your release may have been delayed for more than three hours after your bail was paid, you may be eligible for a settlement payment. You will need to submit a claim form online or by mail in order to receive a payment from the Settlement. If your claim is valid, you will get $3,500 for each time your release on bail was delayed. Claim forms will be mailed to identified class members in approximately January 2023. The deadline to submit a claim form either by mail or online at www.NYCBailSettlement.com is June 6, 2023. You may register through the website to be told when the claim forms go live.

Please contact bail@ecbalaw.com if you have questions.

Article

ECBAWM Wins First Amendment Challenge in the Second Circuit

ECBAWM successfully defended a government official’s First Amendment right to strongly criticize the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups. The victory came when the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court decision and dismissed all claims against former New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo brought by the National Rifle Association of America.

In a 3-0 decision, the Second Circuit held that the NRA failed to plausibly allege that Ms. Vullo violated its First Amendment rights and that Ms. Vullo was entitled to qualified immunity in her role as DFS Superintendent. The court held that Ms. Vullo was “simply executing her duties as DFS Superintendent and engaging in legitimate enforcement action” when she prosecuted insurance companies’ violations of New York’s insurance law related to the NRA’s CarryGuard product. Ms. Vullo also “was doing her job in good faith” when she advised financial institutions to evaluate the reputational risks of affiliating with the NRA in the wake of the tragic Parkland shooting.

“The ruling validates the work done by a superb public servant who did her job with integrity and passion,” said ECBAWM partner Andrew G. Celli, Jr., who argued the appeal on behalf of former Superintendent Vullo. Ms. Vullo also lauded the Second Circuit’s decision. “For four years, the NRA has proceeded with this baseless case while I remained steadfast in my position,” she said. ECBAWM partner Debra L. Greenberger and associate Marissa R. Benavides also represented Ms. Vullo in the appeal and underlying litigation.

Read the decision

Press
“2nd Circuit rejects NRA claims against ex-NY state official,” Associated Press
“NRA free speech lawsuit against New York regulator is dismissed,” Reuters
“NRA Loses First Amendment Suit Against N.Y. Insurance Regulator,” Bloomberg Law
“2nd Circ. Overturns NRA’s Free Speech Win,” Law360.com

Article

17 ECBAWM Attorneys Named to 2022 Super Lawyers Lists

The firm is pleased to announce that 17 of its attorneys have been named to the 2022 Super Lawyers lists.

Firm partners Jonathan S. Abady, Matthew D. Brinckerhoff, Andrew G. Celli, Jr., Richard D. Emery, Debra L. Greenberger, Daniel J. Kornstein, Hal R. Lieberman, Ilann M. Maazel, Zoe Salzman, Sam Shapiro, Earl S. Ward, and O. Andrew F. Wilson were named 2022 Super Lawyers.

Associates David Berman, Nick Bourland, Andrew Jondahl, Vivake Prasad, and Max Selver were named 2022 Super Lawyers Rising Stars.

The Super Lawyers list is issued by Thompson Reuters. A description of the selection methodology can be found on the Super Lawyers website.

Article

ECBAWM Attorneys Earn Recognition from ALM for OSU Case

ECBAWM’s representation of the plaintiffs in Snyder-Hill v. The Ohio State University earned Ilann M. Maazel, Debbie Greenberger, and Marissa Benavides runner-up honors in American Lawyer Media’s Litigator of the Week recognition. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently revived plaintiffs’ claims against OSU stemming from abuse by former OSU physician and athletic team doctor Richard Strauss.

Article

6th Cir Court of Appeals Reinstates Sex Abuse Case Against The Ohio State University

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated the lawsuits of over a hundred sexual abuse survivors against Ohio State University and rejected OSU’s statute of limitation defense.

This decision paves the way for plaintiffs to hold OSU accountable in federal court for the school’s decades-long role in facilitating and concealing the sexual abuse of hundreds of students and others by university physician Dr. Richard Strauss.

In its opinion, the Court explained three independent reasons plaintiffs’ claims should be allowed to proceed. “First, the plaintiffs plausibly allege that they did not know and lacked reason to know that Ohio State caused their injury. Second, they plausibly allege that even if they had investigated further, they could not have learned of Ohio State’s conduct. Third, most plaintiffs plausibly allege that they did not know that they were abused. Alone, each of these grounds is sufficient to delay accrual.”

“For years, Ohio State University hid behind a phony statute of limitations defense to avoid accountability for one of the biggest sexual abuse scandals in the history of American higher education,” said ECBAWM partner Ilann M. Maazel, who argued the appeal on behalf of over a hundred sexual abuse survivors. “Now OSU can finally be held accountable for enabling and covering up decades of abuse.”

Press
“Court ruling revives unsettled lawsuits vs. Ohio State over sexual abuse by late team doctor Richard Strauss,” Associated Press (also published in ESPN.com, The Public’s Radio)
“Strauss Victims Win Appeal, Able to Move Forward with Case Against Ohio State,” The Lantern
“Lawsuits against Ohio State alleging sex abuse by team doctor can move forward,” NBC News
“Judge allows Strauss survivors’ suit against Ohio State to move forward,” NBC4i.com
“Appeals court rules in favor of Strauss victims, revives lawsuits against Ohio State,” The Columbus Dispatch
“’Milestone’ for victims in the Dr. Richard Strauss court battle,” ABC 6

Article

Nine ECBAWM Partners Named to Lawdragon’s “500 Leading Plaintiff Employment & Civil Rights Lawyers” 2022 List

ECBAWM is pleased to announce that nine firm partners have been named to the “2022 Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Employment & Civil Rights Lawyers” list. The list was created “through nominations and independent journalistic research vetted by peers and adversaries,” legal media company Lawdragon explained on its website.

Matthew D. Brinckerhoff, Andrew G. Celli, Jr., Debra L. Greenberger, Ilann Margalit Maazel, Katherine Rosenfeld, Zoe Salzman, Sam Shapiro, Earl S. Ward, and O. Andrew F. Wilson were each recognized as attorneys “who have dedicated their careers to standing up for our rights in workplaces and in society.”

Article

ECBAWM Files Civil Rights Lawsuit on Behalf of George Bell, Wrongfully Imprisoned for Over 24 Years

ECBAWM, together with co-counsel Scott Stevenson, has filed a civil rights lawsuit against the city of New York and eight former New York City police officers on behalf of George Bell. The suit alleges that as a result of rampant misconduct by the police and prosecutors within the Queens County District Attorney’s Office, Mr. Bell was convicted of a double homicide that he did not commit. Mr. Bell faced the death penalty before being sentenced to life in prison. He was 19 years old at the time of his arrest. Mr. Bell’s conviction was vacated and he was finally freed at the age of 44, having spent over 24 years incarcerated.

During the criminal investigation of the crimes for which Mr. Bell was charged the police pursued Mr. Bell based on an unreliable tip, interrogated Mr. Bell through the night on Christmas Eve, and then brutally beat him until he agreed to falsely confess. After Mr. Bell’s arrest, the prosecution and/or police came into possession of exonerating evidence that they did not disclose to Mr. Bell. This evidence made clear that a local armed robbery gang called Speedstick, not Mr. Bell, had committed these murders, and law enforcement knew it years before Mr. Bell was even tried. Rather than admit that they had the wrong man, police and district attorneys suppressed this evidence and fabricated additional evidence to implicate Mr. Bell. These civil rights violations were part of a pattern of the Queens District Attorney’s Office under District Attorney Richard Brown that has recently come to light and has formed the basis for multiple wrongful conviction claims against the City of New York. When vacating Mr. Bell’s conviction, Queens County Supreme Court Justice Zayas concluded that law enforcement’s handling of Mr. Bell’s case “leaves the distinct impression that the suppression of the [exonerating] information was not an isolated instance of misconduct, but part of a larger pattern of behavior that was calculated to deprive the defendants of fair trials, which is particularly egregious given that the death penalty was being sought against 19-year-old George Bell.”

Mr. Bell is represented by Richard Emery, Earl Ward, Debra Greenberger, and David Berman of ECBAWM, as well as co-counsel Scott Stevenson.

Article

ECBAWM Challenges Dismissal of 118 Plaintiffs’ Sex Abuse Claims Against The Ohio State University in the Sixth Circuit, Five Amicus Briefs Filed in Support of Plaintiffs

On February 2, ECBAWM filed opening briefs in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the District Court’s decision to dismiss cases Snyder-Hill v. OSU and Moxley v. OSU as untimely. The two cases, in which ECBAWM represents 118 plaintiff-survivors, bring Title IX claims on behalf of men who survived sexual abuse by OSU physician Richard Strauss from the 1970s to the 1990s and did not know of OSU’s role in facilitating that abuse until a whistleblower came forward in 2018. The briefs argue that the trial court erred in dismissing the claims of these survivors on the basis that they should have brought their claims when the abuse happened, because no plaintiff knew OSU enabled Dr. Strauss’ predation and most did not know that Dr. Strauss’s medical exams were actually sexual abuse.

On February 9, five organizations and scholars filed amicus briefs, or “friend of the court” briefs, in support of the appeals. The organizations and scholars include the National Crime Victim Law Institute, Child USA, Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN), the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Women’s Sports Foundation, civil procedure law professors, psychology and psychiatry professors, and the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC). A link to and a short summary of each brief is below:

RAINN, et al:  This brief explains how schools often place their own interests ahead of student-survivors, how they may protect their interests by misleading student-survivors and not providing evidence, and how the District Court erred by not recognizing these obstacles to a sexual abuse survivor’s ability to obtain evidence of a school’s role in enabling abuse.

Psychology Professors: This brief explains some of the reasons why people do not recognize sexual abuse as such at the time it happens, and that people can still suffer serious short-term and long-term harm even when they don’t recognize what they suffered was sexual abuse.

NCVC:  This brief explains the challenges that medical patients face in recognizing sexual abuse in the physician-patient context and described numerous examples of doctors misusing the trust patients place in them to abuse patients.

NWLC, Women’s Sports Foundation, et al:  This brief explains the challenges that student-athletes face in recognizing acts of sexual abuse in the context of college athletics.

Civil Procedure Professors:  This brief explains the history of Title IX and the proper use of the federal discovery rule to analyze when plaintiffs should have discovered their claim.

The Snyder-Hill and Moxley plaintiffs are represented by ECBAWM’s Ilann M. MaazelDebra Greenberger, and Marissa Benavides, along with Scott Elliot Smith LPA and Public Justice.

 

.