Airbnb Turns to Kaplan in Bid to Overturn NYC Law Demanding Host Info
In Airbnb Inc.'s new lawsuit against the New York City government over its law requiring disclosure of hosts offering up rooms for rent in the city, the company has once again enlisted the legal firepower of Roberta Kaplan, a star litigator well-known for her civil rights work.
August 28, 2018 at 05:49 PM
4 minute read
In Airbnb Inc.'s new lawsuit against the New York City government over its law requiring disclosure of hosts offering up rooms for rent in the city, the company has once again enlisted the legal firepower of Roberta Kaplan, a star litigator well-known for her civil rights work.
Kaplan, who successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013 to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law that effectively banned same-sex marriage, is teaming up with Sharon Nelles of Sullivan & Cromwell, arguing that the city's new law is an “extraordinary” act of government overreach that was the product of a multimillion-dollar campaign by the hotel industry and was designed to frighten New Yorkers into giving up home sharing.
The law, which was passed in a time when New York City has begun to take a more aggressive approach toward regulating gig economy giants like Airbnb and Uber, requires Airbnb to turn over the names and addresses of its hosts, as well as the prices they charge, on a monthly basis.
“It should come as no surprise that this surveillance regime far exceeds in scope and severity the regulations imposed on any other industry in New York City. New York City hotels are not required to disclose this same information about all of their patrons' stays,” the company alleged in the suit, which was filed on Aug. 24 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Kaplan recently left Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison to start a firm now called Kaplan Hecker & Fink.
“Sharon Nelles and I are proud to represent Airbnb in this important lawsuit seeking to strike a NYC ordinance that is truly unprecedented in scope and intrusiveness,” Kaplan said in written statement. ”Like other cases I have litigated in my career, this case involves enforcing fundamental constitutional rights, this time the core value of privacy under the Fourth Amendment and federal Stored Communications Act.”
In addition to Kaplan and Nelles, Airbnb is being represented by Sullivan & Cromwell special counsel John McCarthy and Kaplan Hecker's John Quinn.
Assistant Corporation Counsel Karen Selvin of the New York City Law Department is appearing for the city in the case.
“This law provides the city with the critical data it needs to preserve our housing stock, keep visitors safe, and ensure residents feel secure in their homes and neighborhoods, and the city will defend it,” said Christian Klossner, executive director of the Mayor's Office of Special Enforcement, which enforces the city's rules on short-term rentals and would be tasked with collecting the home-sharing data that Airbnb is supposed to provide.
Prior to the passage of the new regulations for Airbnb, city leaders have argued that Airbnb was allowing some New Yorkers to get away with using their apartments as year-round hotels, putting residents' safety at risk, increasing rents and in some cases placing rent-regulated and rent-stabilized apartments out of reach of low-income tenants.
The lawsuit is not the first time that Kaplan has gone to battle for the home-sharing service. She represented the company in 2014 in its clash with the New York state government as then-Attorney General Eric Schneiderman was also seeking host data to determine if apartments were being rented out illegally through the service.
In 2015, Kaplan co-authored an article for the University of Chicago Law Review that faulted “poorly drafted laws” to regulate Airbnb that fail to account for the challenges presented by the sharing economy and how the company entered into negotiations with Schneiderman in which it agreed to provide anonymized data to his office to help it track down illegal hoteliers.
Kaplan also defended the company against a suit filed by a real estate broker, which a Manhattan federal judge dismissed last year.
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 AllGC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Luigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
4 minute readDistressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
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