New York City Defenders Sue Court Administrators Alleging Reopening Is Causing Bias Against Disabled
The lawsuit comes days after the organizations publicly objected to the planned return of the in-person court proceedings for nonemergency matters.
July 15, 2020 at 11:49 AM
4 minute read
Public defender organizations launched a lawsuit Tuesday against The New York state court system, saying a criminal court plan to start in-person appearances discriminates against people with disabilities.
The suit, filed in the federal Southern District of New York, is brought by the Legal Aid Society, Brooklyn Defender Services, the Bronx Defenders, New York County Defender Services, Neighborhood Defender Service of Harlem and Queens Defenders.
"Plaintiffs' clients with these disabilities face the tragic and illegal choice between their fundamental right to participate in their own cases and their health and safety," according to the lawsuit.
Hundreds of clients and staff members with the public defender organizations have medical vulnerabilities that place them at a high risk of death or serious illness from the virus, according to the lawsuit.
"The completely unnecessary rush to throw hundreds of people back into the courts on almost no notice is nothing short of traumatic and irresponsible," the lawsuit argues.
Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks is listed as a defendant.
The lawsuit says the state court system violates the Americans with Disabilities Act by following a policy that does not take into account a person's disability. The policy also does not provide reasonable modifications, like virtual court appearances or sufficient advance notice for a court appearance, according to the lawsuit.
"Communication has been chaotic at best," according to the lawsuit. "In many cases thus far, neither the Public Defenders nor the individual counsel of record received notice of a case being selected until less than 48 hours prior to the appearance."
The court plan discriminates against individuals with disabilities who "need sufficient notice to seek and receive accommodations or modifications" before an appearance, the lawsuit argues.
The organizations are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, specifically an order directing the state court system to pause implementation of the in-person order.
State courts spokesman Lucian Chalfen issued a statement saying defender organizations "had already agreed to, and we have already held, in person appearances for some of their clients."
"As we begin our entirely legal plan for a slow return to normalized operations, with a focus on personal health and safety, starting today, we are calendaring approximately 10 in person cases a day in each Court," he said in a statement.
The lawsuit comes days after the organizations publicly objected to the return of the in-person court proceedings for nonemergency matters.
New York County Defender Services executive director Stan Germán said Thursday that, prior to any announcement by court officials, the defender organizations believed OCA had been planning to wait for a report from public health experts who were touring courthouses before reopening.
Germán said there are also questions about whether the move was inspired by New York City Bill de Blasio's statement to The New York Times about the court system "not working" amid a spike in the city's gun violence.
"The mayor came out on Monday, I believe, in The New York Times and essentially blamed the courts not being fully reopened for the rising shootings in uptown Manhattan," Germán said. "I don't understand that logic, I don't know what courts opening in person has to do with those shootings. OCA issued a statement pushing back on any notion that you could make a correlation between the two, but there are individuals who feel that perhaps this was in reaction to the mayor's criticism."
Jane Wester contributed to this report.
READ MORE:
Public Defenders Call on NY Courts to Reconsider In-Person Appearances During Reopening Process
'Major Milestone': NYC Judges Return to Courthouses as City Enters Phase One of Coronavirus Reopening
Court Officials Vow New Push to Enact DiFiore's Reorganization Plan, After Its Exclusion From Budget Deal
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
© 2025 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 AllDecision of the Day: Judge Rules Brutality Claims Against Hudson Valley Police Officer to Proceed to Trial
Skadden and Steptoe, Defending Amex GBT, Blasts Biden DOJ's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Merger Proposal
4 minute readRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Has New York Sentence Pardoned by Trump
- 2Settlement Allows Spouses of U.S. Citizens to Reopen Removal Proceedings
- 3CFPB Resolves Flurry of Enforcement Actions in Biden's Final Week
- 4Judge Orders SoCal Edison to Preserve Evidence Relating to Los Angeles Wildfires
- 5Legal Community Luminaries Honored at New York State Bar Association’s Annual Meeting
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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