Lax Oversight Enabled Illegal Wiretaps by Ex-Brooklyn Prosecutor, Lawyers Say in Proposed Class Suit
Relatives of an ex-Brooklyn DA's two surveillance targets allege she likely listened to the phone conversations of at least 700 other people during that period.
November 27, 2018 at 03:31 PM
4 minute read
Hundreds of law enforcement officials and New York City employees whose phone conversations were picked up on a former Brooklyn prosecutor's illegal wiretaps may be entitled to thousands of dollars in damages, attorneys have alleged in a proposed class action filed in federal court.
Tara Lenich, who worked as deputy bureau chief in charge of investigations for the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office, was sentenced in February to one year in prison after admitting that she forged judges' signatures to obtain wiretap orders to listen in on the phone conversations of a fellow prosecutor and a New York City police detective for a period of about 18 months.
But relatives of Lenich's two surveillance targets, police detective Jarrett Lemieux and now-former Brooklyn prosecutor Stephanie Rosenfeld, allege in their proposed class action, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, that Lenich likely listened to the phone conversations of at least 700 other people, inside and outside of law enforcement, who had voice or text exchanges with Lemieux and Rosenfeld during that period.
Under the Wiretap Act, anyone whose phone conversations were subject to Lenich's eavesdropping could be entitled to up to $10,000 in statutory damages, said Richard Emery of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady, one of the attorneys for Danielle Rosenfeld, Rosenfeld's sister; and Vincent Garcia, Lemieux's uncle.
The plaintiffs' attorneys also allege that Lenich was able to conduct her surveillance operation in “plain view” of her supervisors at the Brooklyn DA's office because of lax oversight: they allege that, had they been keeping proper records of her wiretap activities, they would have learned that she was conducting an unauthorized investigation from June 2015 until her arrest in November 2016.
Additionally, the plaintiffs allege, the Brooklyn DA's office did not submit records about its wiretapping activities to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which they say is required by state and federal law, during the years that Lenich was conducting the illegal operation.
Emery said the failure to submit the wiretap information, which was gathered in 2014 and 2017—the years before and after Lenich's illegal wiretap operation—shows that the Brooklyn DA's office harbors a “cavalier attitude about wiretaps.”
The Brooklyn DA's office referred questions to the city's Law Department.
“We'll review the complaints and respond accordingly,” a Law Department spokesman said.
Eric Creizman of Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht, who represents Lenich in a civil suit that Stephanie Rosenfeld filed last year, said he had not yet carefully reviewed the two suits, but said “we will defend these claims vigorously, both on issues of law and fact.”
In addition to Emery, Emery Celli attorney Samuel Shapiro and Wiggin and Dana attorneys James Glasser and Tadhg A.J. Dooley represent the proposed class.
Wiggin and Dana also represents Lemieux, who has since retired from the NYPD, in a new suit filed in the Eastern District in which, similar to the proposed class, he alleges that Lenich was able to conduct her surveillance operation because of the Brooklyn DA's “custom of deliberate indifference” toward wiretaps.
Read more:
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 AllAttorneys 'On the Move': Structured Finance Attorney Joins Hunton Andrews Kurth; Foley Adds IP Partner
4 minute readNY Civil Liberties Legal Director Stepping Down After Lengthy Tenure
Former Top Aide to NYC Mayor Is Charged With Bribery Conspiracy
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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