Big Law Backs Portland and Minneapolis Protesters' Abuse-of-Force Suits
Several large firms have a hand in a wave of litigation over protests in Minneapolis and the use of federal law enforcement in Portland, Oregon.
July 28, 2020 at 11:30 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Large law firms are helping lead a wave of litigation that has emerged since George Floyd's killing in Minneapolis in late May, alleging excessive force by police officers at protests and other acts of police violence.
The ACLU of Minnesota and attorneys with Fish & Richardson are teaming up for a class action lawsuit filed Tuesday against Minneapolis and city police officials over injuries suffered by protesters demonstrating in the wake of Floyd's death. Meanwhile, firms including Debevoise & Plimpton, Snell & Wilmer and Perkins Coie are involved in a series of lawsuits filed in connection to the recent use of federal law enforcement in Portland, Oregon.
The Minneapolis lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota on behalf of four named protesters and others who were injured during the protests that swept the city starting in late May.
"Historically, law enforcement in Minneapolis specifically, and Minnesota more generally, have attempted to suppress the right of its citizens to assemble peacefully. Recently, they have been and are actively suppressing this right by exercising unnecessary and excessive force against protesters who gathered to express their outrage at the murder of George Floyd at the hands of the Minneapolis Police Department," the complaint reads. "This unnecessarily forceful treatment of protesters, at the expense of proper constitutional protections, casts a pall over future protests and cannot continue."
The lawsuit targets the city and police authorities, including Minneapolis Chief of Police Medaria Arradondo, "for retaliating against persons engaging in First Amendment-protected activity; for applying excessive force; and for violating procedural due process rights by firing chemical irritants and other less-lethal munitions for the purpose of intimidation without a constitutionally-sufficient warning."
Ahmed Davis, a principal at Fish & Richardson's Washington, D.C., office who is leading the lawsuit, said in an interview the firm has previously worked alongside the ACLU's Minnesota chapter on other pro bono matters and the organization reached out to the practice to file the complaint.
He said while Fish traditionally focuses on intellectual property law, the firm has strengthened its pro bono practice in recent years and amplified its racial justice work in the wake of Floyd's killing. Fish recently announced a "racial justice initiative" as part of those efforts; Davis said Tuesday's lawsuit is not necessarily part of that project, "but it certainly speaks to what that initiative is about."
"There's something different about being able to invest the firm's resources and its abilities in assisting everyday people with things that matter to everyday people, and addressing larger societal issues in the firm," Davis said.
The new Minneapolis lawsuit describes lasting injuries the named individuals suffered since participating in protests. The complaint states that Nekima Levy Armstrong and Marques Armstrong, a married couple, were teargassed by officers at a May 27 protest, and "and are still experiencing residual effects from the tear gas."
"Since the MPD sprayed her with tear gas, Plaintiff Nekima Levy Armstrong has had lingering lung issues and her voice has not returned to full strength. She routinely uses her voice as an instrument to lead chants at protests and the damage to her voice as a result of the tear gas has limited her ability to do that," the lawsuit reads.
The other named individuals, Terry Hempfling and Rachel Clark, were both teargassed and struck by less-lethal munition such as rubber bullets fired by Minneapolis police officers, according to the complaint. The lawsuit includes images of their injuries.
The ACLU of Minnesota last month worked with firms Fredrikson & Byron and Apollo Law for a class action suit on behalf of reporters covering the protests, claiming officers were targeting and attacking the media in violation of the Constitution.
Several lawsuits have also been filed in connection to the use of federal law enforcement in Portland. The ACLU of Oregon sued the Trump administration alleging attacks on reporters in Portland with firm BraunHagey & Borden, and filed a separate complaint on behalf of Portland street medics alongside attorneys at Perkins Coie. Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum also sued the administration, but a federal judge denied her bid for a temporary restraining order against federal authorities.
Snell & Wilmer attorneys are also behind another Portland complaint, and on Monday lawyers with Debevoise & Plimpton and Perkins Coie filed a federal complaint in Washington, D.C., trial court on behalf of women and women groups at the protests, including the recently formed organization "Wall of Moms."
While Tuesday's lawsuit does not address federal law enforcement, Davis pointed to the complaint as a way to address the dangers of law enforcement using excessive force. He noted that while three of the named plaintiffs are experienced protesters, Clark was a first-time demonstrator, and even seeing force used against other protesters can have a chilling effect.
"I think that this suit and others like it that may well be coming are very important, because what we see happening in Portland, in Seattle and in many other cities is emblematic of a very disconcerting trend in this country that seeks to quell free speech," Davis said. "And if we're not careful, if we don't address it head-on and call it what it is, we could find ourselves in a society in the not-too-distant future that doesn't look anything like the America that our forefathers envisioned and that many have fought and died for."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBig Law Communications, Media Attorneys Brace for Changes Under Trump
4 minute readPolsinelli's Revenue and Profits Surge Amid Partner De-Equitizations, Retirements
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
- 2Attorney Sanctioned for Not Exercising Ordinary Care: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
- 3$1.9M Settlement Approved in Class Suit Over Vacant Property Fees
- 4Former Wamco Exec Charged With $600M 'Cherry-Picking' Fraud
- 5Stock Trading App Robinhood Hit With Privacy Class Action 1 Month After Alleged Data Breach
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250