Article

Anthony Sims Freed After 25 Years

Anthony Sims has been granted parole and freed from prison after serving over 25 years for a murder he did not commit. Anthony was wrongfully convicted of murdering Li Run Chen at a Brooklyn restaurant; evidence that was withheld from the jury exonerated Anthony and points to Julius Graves – the prosecution’s only eyewitness to the shooting – as the killer.

In an interview with NBC New York’s Sarah Wallace, ECBAWM partner Ilann M. Maazel, one of Anthony’s attorneys, explained what led to his unlawful conviction. “The NYPD basically ignored any evidence that exonerated Anthony, and the most glaring example is when an independent witness saw Julius Graves exit the restaurant with a gun right after the shooting, told that to the police, and the police kept that information, apparently, to themselves.”

Prosecutors have labeled two witnesses who testified that the police fabricated interview reports as “incredible” and continue to back Graves’ version of the events. “They seem to want to stand behind this man who has lied repeatedly under oath in different statements over the years and it’s frustrating,” said another of Anthony’s attorneys, ECBAM partner Sam Shapiro.

Anthony’s motion to vacate his conviction is currently pending before the Hon. Danny Chun in Kings County. A decision is expected in January.

Keisha Sims, Anthony’s wife, told NBC New York she will never stop fighting. “Not just only for my husband, but there’s a lot of Anthonys out there.”

ECBAWM attorneys Ilann M. Maazel, Sam Shapiro, and Nairuby L. Beckles, along with co-counsel Thomas Hoffman and Jonathan Hiles, represent Anthony Sims. More information about the case is available on the Free Anthony Sims website.

Article

ECBAWM Attorneys Earn Recognition from ALM for Jury Verdict in Sexual Assault Case

ECBAWM’s representation of Haleigh Breest in her sexual assault case against director Paul Haggis earned attorneys Zoe Salzman, Ilann M. Maazel, Jonathan Abady, Sara Luz Estela, and Noel León and paralegal Sophia Attie “Shout Out” honors in American Lawyer Media’s Litigator of the Week column. A jury found Haggis civilly liable for raping Ms. Breest and awarded a total judgment of $10 million.

Article

ECBAWM Client Gets $8.25 Million in Wrongful Conviction Case

On November 15, 2022, the City of Detroit agreed to pay $8.25 million to settle a federal wrongful conviction lawsuit brought by ECBAWM on behalf of Kendrick Scott. Mr. Scott spent over 19 years in prison for a murder he did not commit as a result of civil rights violations by Detroit Police Department detectives. The case alleged that the detectives coerced witnesses, including an intoxicated 14-year-old boy, into giving false statements and also hid evidence, including an exculpatory statement the victim made to her sister.

Mr. Scott was wrongfully convicted in 2000 and was exonerated in 2018, after the University of Michigan Innocence Clinic secured a reversal of his conviction from the Michigan Supreme Court and the prosecutor’s office later dismissed all charges. “Nothing will change the fact that Mr. Scott lost nearly two decades of freedom for something he had nothing to do with,” ECBAWM attorney Zoe Salzman said. “But this settlement speaks to the seriousness of the harm Mr. Scott experienced and will help Mr. Scott focus on the future.”

ECBAWM attorneys Zoe Salzman and Nick Bourland represent Mr. Scott, along with Bill Goodman of Goodman Hurwitz & James PC in Detroit.

Related News
ECBAWM Defeats Detroit Police Officers’ Attempt to Avoid Trial in Wrongful Conviction Case
ECBAWM Files Case for Innocent Man Who Spent 20 Years in Jail

Article

ECBAWM Wins $10M Jury Verdict in Sexual Assault Case

A jury has found film director Paul Haggis civilly liable for raping Haleigh Breest, a film industry publicist, in 2013. The jury heard testimony from Ms. Breest as well as from four other women who also accused Haggis of sexual misconduct.

Haggis was ordered to pay $7.5 million in compensatory damages and $2.5 million in punitive damages, for a total verdict of $10 million.

Despite Haggis’ attempt to have the case dismissed in 2018, ECBAWM obtained a landmark ruling enforcing New York City’s Victims of Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act and allowing the case to proceed. The New York State Supreme Court’s decision was upheld on appeal.

ECBAWM also won Ms. Breest’s motion to compel Haggis to provide a sample of his DNA for comparison against a sample left in Ms. Breest’s tights.

“We’re pleased to see justice served for Ms. Breest,” said Ilann M. Maazel and Zoe Salzman who represented Ms. Breest, together with ECBAWM partner Jonathan S. Abady, associates Sara Luz Estela and Noel León, paralegal Sophia Attie, and former-associate Emma Freeman. Dan Cooper served as a trial consultant in the case.

“After the jury heard a mountain of undeniable evidence against Mr. Haggis, they did the right thing and held him accountable for his deplorable behavior. We commend Ms. Breest for the bravery it took to come forward. She stood up for herself and for all women,” said Maazel and Salzman.

Press
“Jury tells filmmaker Haggis to pay $10M total in rape suit,” Associated Press, also published by NBC News, CTV News, CBC News and The Hollywood Reporter
“Paul Haggis Fined Additional $2.5 Million in Punitive Damages in Civil Rape Trial,” Variety
“Oscar-winner Paul Haggis must pay total of $10 million in civil rape case,” Reuters
“‘Crash’ director Paul Haggis must pay $10M to rape accuser Haleigh Breest,” New York Post
“Paul Haggis Rape Trial Jury Tacks on $2.5 Million in Punitive Damages, Bringing Victim’s Award to $10 Million,” The Wrap
“Paul Haggis Ordered to Pay $2.5 Million More in Rape Trial Verdict,” Just Jared
“Filmmaker Paul Haggis ordered to pay total of $10M in rape lawsuit,” Fox News
“Paul Haggis Civil Trial: Jury Awards $2.5M In Punitive Damages; Oscar Winner Says He Will Appeal & “Die Clearing My Name” – Update,” Deadline
“Jury orders Oscar-winner Paul Haggis to pay additional $2.5m in rape lawsuit,” The Guardian
“Church of Scientology is on opposite ends of two celebrity rape cases in L.A., New York,” Los Angeles Times
“‘Broke’ Paul Haggis Must Pay Another $2.5M to Rape Accuser,” Daily Beast
“Jury Says Paul Haggis Raped Woman After Film Premiere,” New York Times
“Paul Haggis, director of ‘Crash,’ ordered to pay $7.5 million in rape case,” Washington Post
“Jury orders Filmmaker Paul Haggis to pay $7.5M in rape suit,” Associated Press, also published in the Wall Street Journal
“Paul Haggis Found Liable On All Counts In New York Rape Civil Trial; Jury Awards Millions In Damages; Oscar Winner Vows To “Fight To Clear My Name,” Deadline
“Paul Haggis Loses New York Civil Rape Case, Liable for $7.5 Million in Damages,” The Wrap
“Paul Haggis Found Liable on All Counts in Civil Rape Trial,” Variety
“Jury finds filmmaker Paul Haggis liable for rape of publicist, awarding her $7.5 million in compensatory damages,” Insider
“Oscar-Winning Writer Hit With $7.5M Rape Verdict In NY,” Law360
“‘Crash’ director Paul Haggis loses rape suit, owes $7.5M in damages to victim Haleigh Breest,” New York Post
“Film-maker Paul Haggis ordered to pay $7.5m to woman accusing him of rape,” The Guardian
“Filmmaker Paul Haggis is ordered to pay at least $7.5 million after being found liable in a sexual assault case involving a former publicist,” CNN
“Paul Haggis: Filmmaker ordered to pay $7.5m in rape suit,” BBC
“Paul Haggis accuser speaks out after director is found liable in $7.5 million rape lawsuit,” Fox News
“Oscar-winning filmmaker Paul Haggis found liable for raping woman in 2013, ordered to pay $7.5 million,” The Week
“Director Paul Haggis Found Liable in N.Y. Rape Case, Jury Awards $7.5 Million in Damages,” People
“Judge Orders Paul Haggis To Shell Out $7.5 Million After Director Was Found Liable In Rape Case,” OK! Magazine
“Paul Haggis Loses Civil Rape Case, Ordered to Pay Accuser $7.5 Million,” Rolling Stone
“Oscar-winner Paul Haggis ordered to pay $7.5 mln in civil rape case,” Reuters

Article

Federal Lawsuit Over Disability Discrimination and Severe Mistreatment at Brooklyn Home for People with Disabilities Settles for $2.25 Million

The family of an autistic and disabled man has agreed to a $2.25 million settlement in a civil rights lawsuit against Eihab Human Services, Inc., an operator of homes and other programs for people with disabilities. The lawsuit alleged Eihab abused, neglected, and almost killed the disabled man. The case was litigated for a decade until the settlement was reached in the middle of a nearly week-long jury trial in a New York federal court. The judge who presided over the case approved the settlement on October 13, 2022.

ECBAWM was assisted by noted jury consultant Dan Cooper in preparation for the trial.

The plaintiff, “A.W.”, the mother of “B.W.”, the young man, filed the lawsuit on behalf of her son in 2012. The complaint alleges that while under Eihab’s care, B.W. was rushed to the hospital six different times, nearly choked to death on a corncob, and had to have a feeding tube inserted after his weight sunk below 100 pounds.

“I’m so thankful we have finally been able to achieve some justice for my son,” said A.W.

“After ten long years, we have a measure of justice for B.W. and his family and accountability for Eihab,” said ECBAWM partner Ilann M. Maazel. “We are gratified that B.W. and his family finally have some closure after this terrible period in their lives.”

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

Federal Lawsuit Over Barbaric Shackling of Pregnant Woman Settles with New Jersey County for $750,000

Today, ECBAWM and co-counsel Gibbons P.C. announced the settlement of a lawsuit on behalf of the family of a woman who was illegally shackled by Middlesex County, New Jersey officers. The magistrate judge who presided over the case in a New Jersey federal court approved the settlement on September 7, 2022, and the agreement was publicly filed earlier today.

The plaintiff, “Jane Doe,” filed the lawsuit in July 2020. The lawsuit stated that, when she was pregnant and incarcerated in the Middlesex County Jail on a non-violent charge, Middlesex County officers and supervisors shackled her by the wrists, ankles, and waist during prenatal visits, while she was being transported to the hospital, throughout the labor process, up until the moment of an emergency Cesarian section, and even while she was recovering and attempting to bond with her newborn son. When she arrived at the hospital, the officers refused to let Ms. Doe contact her family, forcing her to endure this traumatizing experience alone.

Under the settlement, Middlesex County will pay $750,000 to Ms. Doe’s estate, believed to be one of the largest settlements ever obtained by a victim of shackling during labor. Ms. Doe tragically passed away during the litigation, but her mother “Mary Doe” continued to prosecute and settle the case on behalf of Jane Doe’s estate, and specifically her young son.

“Through this litigation, our daughter sought to inform pregnant incarcerated women of their legal rights,” Ms. Doe’s parents said. “She wanted to bring attention to the horrific harm and injustices that she endured and that so many like her continue to endure. We hope this case has served as a wakeup call to Middlesex County and to law enforcement agencies around the country. They should immediately reform their policies and respect the humanity of the people in their custody.”

Medical experts, correctional experts, and maternal and fetal health experts unanimously agree that pregnant women should not be shackled absent the most extraordinary circumstances. The American Medical Association, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, all prohibit and/or oppose shackling pregnant women during labor, delivery, and postpartum recovery because it poses a grave risk of harm to a pregnant woman’s health, and to the health and safety of her baby.

“According to a 2021 study, there are an estimated 58,000 admissions of pregnant women into U.S. jails and prisons every year, and thousands give birth or have other outcomes while still incarcerated. Our client Jane Doe filed this case to protect the health and dignity of incarcerated pregnant women and their babies. This settlement is an important step in ending shackling of pregnant women,” said Katie Rosenfeld, a partner at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP and one of Jane Doe’s lawyers.

Lawrence S. Lustberg, another of Jane Doe’s lawyers, lauded both her courage in bringing the lawsuit and her parent’s tenacity in continuing it. “Were it not for people like Jane Doe and her parents, these kinds of injustices would never be redressed,” Lustberg said. Lustberg also expressed the Doe family’s appreciation for the Court’s assistance in reaching the settlement.

.