Men Arrested at Starbucks Have Retained Cohen Placitella as Civil Counsel
Two black men who were arrested at a Starbucks coffee shop in Philadelphia as they waited to meet an acquaintance for a business meeting have retained counsel from a well-known mass-tort civil litigation firm as protesters Monday staged sit-ins.
April 16, 2018 at 06:35 PM
5 minute read
Philadelphia Councilman Kenyatta Johnson addresses a crowd April 16, 2018, outside of the Starbucks where two black men had been arrested several days before. Photo: Max Mitchell/ALM
Two black men who were arrested April 12 at a Starbucks coffee shop in Philadelphia as they waited to meet an acquaintance for a business meeting have retained counsel from a well-known mass-tort civil litigation firm as protesters Monday staged sit-ins.
Stewart Cohen of Cohen, Placitella & Roth has been retained to explore any possible civil suit, said Center City attorney Lauren Wimmer, who handled the case as the Philadelphia district attorney declined to press charges.
Videos of the arrest quickly went viral under the hashtag #WaitingWhileBlack, and, since that time, there has been a growing public outcry and call for action from city officials. The company's CEO issued an apology, met with the two men, and announced Tuesday that all of the company's more than 8,000 stores will close briefly in May to conduct additional training.
According to media reports, two unidentified men were waiting for local businessman Andrew Yaffe when they were arrested on April 12. The two were released after eight hours as the DA's office rejected further action.
Wimmer, a criminal defense attorney, handled the relatively short-lived criminal proceedings.
According to Wimmer, whose office is not far from the Starbucks, she is friends with Yaffe, and he called her while the incident was unfolding. She said she called the charging unit at the District Attorney's Office to see if it would be going forward, and was told that the office would not be pressing charged.
Ben Waxman, a spokesman for the District Attorney's Office, said prosecutors at the charging unit made the ultimate decision not to press charges based on a lack of evidence. The decision was made within the charging unit without referral to the DA's office upper management.
“Fortunately, we were able to resolve it as quickly as possible,” Wimmer said.
The two men eventually retained Cohen regarding any possible civil actions.
The firm is widely known in the mid-Atlantic region for its focus on mass tort and high-profile personal injury cases, such as the Salvation Army building collapse case. Cohen is also no stranger to taking on large companies. In early 2017, he settled claims against Amazon in a case involving a University of Pennsylvania student who committed suicide using cyanide she bought through the online retail giant.
At a press conference Tuesday, Cohen declined to say whether he planned to file any suits on behalf of the two men.
At the brief press conference Cohen read a joint statement from him and Starbucks in which he said the men have “engaged in constructive discussions” with Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson about the issue.
“We have a situation—and the people at the center of it have come together with civility, common purpose and a willingness to listen and work towards a solution,” Cohen said. “Together we ask that the community respect this process. There will be more to follow.”
Although Cohen has remained silent on whether any civil lawsuits will be forthcoming, Kline & Specter attorney Thomas R. Kline, who is no stranger to bringing high-profile lawsuits against major organizations, said there are several claims the men could pursue against both Starbucks and the city of Philadelphia.
Regarding Starbucks' liability, Kline said the company could be liable for assault, which includes an act that can put someone in immediate fear of harm, and false arrest, since Pennsylvania law says that even those who cause a false arrest can be liable for the damages. He also said the company could be sued for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
“The key to this claim is that the conduct is extreme and outrageous and outside the bounds of decency. Well, that's what the protests are about,” he said.
Regarding other potential suits, Kline said the officers could be sued directly for false arrest, battery and false imprisonment. While those claims all arise out of state law, he said the men could also bring a civil rights claim under federal law for violating their Fourth Amendment rights.
“That claim, if brought, would take the case into federal court, but there is certainly a potential for bringing that claim,” he said.
By Monday, the arrests brought condemnation from Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney and others, including Reggie Shuford, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.
“Starbucks failed these men and all of its customers by treating them in this unfair and demeaning way,” Shuford said in a press statement. “Based on all eyewitness accounts, there was no need for police intervention. These men were terribly disrespected by Starbucks employees.”
Members of the Philadelphia City Council also had strong words for the company.
At a press conference Monday, Philadelphia City Councilman Kenyatta Johnson said he and other city officials had met with Kevin Johnson, but he said he was not impressed and more needs to be done to ensure that businesses cannot engage in any discrimination.
“The meeting was all lip service. I'm not sold,” he told the crowd.
Following the press conference, Councilman Derek Green said anti-discrimination legislation is already on the books to address this issue.
“We have to see change in policy that will not allow this to happen going forward,” Green said.
Green, Kenyatta Johnson and other city officials said that the Philadelphia Human Relations Commission is also investigating the incident.
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 AllPhila. Jury Hits Sig Sauer With $11M Verdict Over Alleged Gun Defect
3 minute readPhila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
4 minute readEx-DLA Piper, Ballard Spahr Atty Accused of Aiding Video Game Company Founder's Misappropriation Scheme
5 minute readBosworth Claims It Was Kline & Specter, Not Him, That Breached Settlement Terms
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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