FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact: cohenmilstein@berlinrosen.com
Victims Allege American Tactical, Inc. Unlawfully Marketed the High Capacity Magazine Used in the FedEx Mass Shooting That Killed Eight
ROCHESTER, NEW YORK (April 13, 2023) – Today, victims and families of victims of the 2021 Indianapolis FedEx mass shooting filed a lawsuit against American Tactical, Inc., the distributor of the high capacity magazine (HCM) used in the mass shooting, where thirteen people were shot, eight fatally. American Tactical, Inc. President Tony DiChario and Marketing Director Joe Calabro, along with the magazine manufacturer Schmeisser GmbH, were also named in the lawsuit.
As the exclusive importer of Schmeisser magazines, the complaint alleges, American Tactical, Inc. marketed, distributed, and sold the high capacity magazine used by the gunman in the FedEx mass shooting. Despite knowing that mass killers are attracted to high capacity magazines to carry out mass shootings, American Tactical, Inc. deliberately marketed and sold the 60-round magazine used in the attack.
“American Tactical, Inc.’s high capacity magazine used in the FedEx mass shooting had 60 rounds, two to three times the killing capacity of standard magazines,” said Leslie Mitchell Kroeger, Partner at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll. “American Tactical, Inc. sold these high capacity magazines without a single safeguard, screening or limit in place, despite knowing that they are unreasonably dangerous to sell to the civilian public. It is clear that the Defendants put profits from high capacity magazines ahead of people, which came at the grave expense of the victims and victims’ families of the FedEx mass shooting.”
Despite a clear duty to take every reasonable step to minimize the likelihood of an unlawful act of violence, the lawsuit contends, American Tactical, Inc. failed to implement any protocols or safeguards to prevent dangerous individuals, like the FedEx shooter, from acquiring the HCM. Additionally, when American Tactical, Inc. and the other Defendants marketed the HCM, they knew or should have known of the existence of a category of consumers containing individuals like the shooter, who would be attracted to such a weapon accessory and could pose a tremendous risk to the safety of others.
“American Tactical, Inc. is well aware that these magazines are instruments of mass killing and have no problem marketing them directly to people with horrific intentions,” said Gurinder Singh Bains, son of Jaswinder Singh who died in the FedEx shooting and a plaintiff in the case. “This isn’t a hypothetical. My father is gone because they didn’t care they were enabling mass shooters. They have to be held accountable not just for my father’s sake but everyone who may still suffer what my family and I have been forced to go through.”
Rather than recognize the clear risk of marketing HCMS, American Tactical, Inc. published several marketing videos in the style of violent video games and action movies, featuring men wearing tactical vests. Notably, during the mass shooting, the gunman wore a tactical vest nearly identical to the gear used in American Tactical, Inc.’s video advertisement.
“Gun manufacturers and distributors know that high capacity magazines are favored by mass shooters due to their ability to kill as many people as possible, therefore American Tactical should have enacted reasonable safeguards to prevent such magazines from falling into the hands of those who should not have them. They failed to do so, and these families are paying that price,” said Kris Brown, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
“High-capacity magazines have no business in civilian hands,” said Philip Bangle, Senior Litigation Counsel at the Brady Center. “If you decide to sell such highly lethal products to the general public anyway, you need to be very careful about who you’re selling them to. As we allege in our complaint, Defendants here have instead taken a hard turn and specifically marketed their highly lethal products to a dangerous class of individuals.”
The Plaintiffs are represented by Leslie Mitchell Kroeger of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, along with Philip Bangle at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
###
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a premier U.S. plaintiffs’ law firm, handling high-profile and precedent-setting litigation. With over 100 attorneys across the country, Cohen Milstein has offices in Washington, DC, Chicago, IL, New York, NY, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Philadelphia, PA, Raleigh, NC, Boston, MA and Minneapolis, MN.
About Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Brady legal has represented victims of the gun industry for over 30 years and has won millions in settlements and verdicts brought by Brady for victims and survivors of gun violence. Brady has also won landmark presidents holding that gun companies can be held legally responsible for damages caused by their irresponsible business practices and has forced gun dealers and manufacturers to reform their business practices.
Brady has one powerful mission — to unite all Americans against gun violence. We work across Congress, the courts, and our communities with over 90 grassroots chapters, bringing together young and old, red and blue, and every shade of color to find common ground in common sense. In the spirit of our namesakes Jim and Sarah Brady, we have fought for over 45 years to take action, not sides, and we will not stop until this epidemic ends. It’s in our hands.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact: cohenmilstein@berlinrosen.com
Class Action Suit Brought Against City of Miramar and Private Engineering Firms for Failure to Properly Treat Water Resulting in Massive Property Damages
Residents of Miramar, Florida claim that the City neglected to correctly treat their water, ultimately corroding their pipes, leading to devastating financial consequences for homeowners.
MIRAMAR, FLORIDA – Residents of Miramar, Florida have filed a class action suit against the City of Miramar related to water contamination resulting in massive property damage. They claim that, due to the negligence of the City and the malpractice of its professional engineering consultants, their water supply has not been properly treated and has caused irreversible and costly damage to copper piping systems in their properties.
“The City of Miramar has abandoned its residents at every step of this process,” said lead counsel Leslie Kroeger, partner at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll. “This situation could have been avoided, but the City along with professional engineering companies allowed improperly treated water to corrode the pipes of homeowners across Miramar, exacting a huge financial toll on many residents. The negligence by both the City of Miramar and the professional engineering companies has caused massive property damage. We look forward to fighting hard to bring about justice to the homeowners who have been so terribly harmed.”
Despite continuous complaints from its residents, the City failed to take necessary action, ultimately causing severe harm to the copper water pipes of multiple homes in Miramar. Pursuant to site investigations and lab evaluations, small pitting holes were found in the piping of each plaintiff’s place of residence. It was determined that this pitting was caused by finished water from Miramar’s West Water Treatment Plant, which uses nanofiltration and reverse osmosis processes to clean the City’s water. The City failed, as part of its treatment process, to add back to the water the minerals necessary to prevent damage to copper piping before it dispensed the water to its residents.
Many Miramar residents have been forced to entirely re-pipe their homes. Rather than accept responsibility, the City advised individuals to replace water pipes at their own expense or take out a loan from the City itself.
The City of Miramar contracted Kimley-Horn, Inc. and Applied Technical Services, Inc. as consultants to help address the water crisis. Both companies failed to instruct the City how to properly treat the water in order to avoid damaging the copper piping of its residents. Accordingly, both companies are facing counts of professional malpractice and negligence in the suit.
The Class Action Complaint has been filed on behalf of the plaintiffs, who are represented by Leslie Kroeger of the national plaintiff firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and Corey Friedman of Romano Law Group.
If you believe your home was damaged due to the negligence of the City of Miramar and the malpractice of its consultants, please call us at 561-515-1400 or complete the contact form.
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a premier U.S. plaintiffs’ law firm, handling high-profile and precedent-setting litigation. With over 100 attorneys across the country, Cohen Milstein has offices in Washington, DC, Chicago, IL, New York, NY, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Philadelphia, PA, Raleigh, NC, Boston, MA and Minneapolis, MN. For additional information, please visit https://www.cohenmilstein.com or call (561) 515-1400.
About Romano Law Group
Romano Law Group is a leading personal injury law firm located in West Palm Beach that provides expert legal representation on a local and national level. For additional information, please visit https://www.romanolawgroup.com or call (561) 468-6493.
Plaintiffs in 26 States Claim General Motors Was Aware of Transmission Defect That Poses Safety Risk to Drivers and Passengers
More than 800,000 Owners of 8-Speed Automatic Transmission Cars Manufactured Between 2015 and March 1, 2019 Are Covered by Certified Classes
DETROIT, Mich. – United States District Judge, for the Eastern District of Michigan, David M. Lawson, granted class certification today to plaintiffs in a massive class action lawsuit across 26 states against General Motors (GM) that alleges the car manufacturer violated state consumer protection statutes by knowingly putting cars with faulty transmissions on the road, endangering drivers, passengers, and pedestrians.
The class is composed of owners of General Motors vehicles with one of two models of eight-speed automatic transmissions, the GM 8L90 or 8L45, which were manufactured between 2015 and March 1, 2019. Plaintiffs claim that while attempting to accelerate or decelerate their cars they may feel a hesitation, lurch, lunge, or other type of “harsh shift.” Some drivers reported the gear shifting as so violent that it feels as if they were hit by another vehicle. Internal company documents obtained in litigation show that even GM had determined the “startling effect” of the harsh shifts can create a safety issue. The vehicles also suffer from a second transmission defect, a shaking or “shudder” while traveling at highway speeds.
“General Motors knowingly sold over 800,000 8-speed transmission vehicles which they knew to be defective for years, and yet made the business decision not to tell its customers before purchase. Dealers were directed to tell the customers that harsh shifts were ‘normal or ‘characteristic.’ Such decision making is both highly irresponsible and emblematic of what GM believes it can get away with. We are very pleased that Judge Lawson’s order is another step closer to bringing justice to the hundreds of thousands of GM customers who were harmed by GMs misconduct”, said Ted Leopold, partner at Cohen Milstein and court-appointed Lead Counsel for the class. “As our lawsuit continues, now certified as a class action, we look forward to demonstrating that General Motors knew before the first car left GMs manufacturing facilities that their 8-speed transmissions were defective yet continuously made the business decision to still sell their cars knowing full well of the vehicle defects and safety concerns.”
In fact, GM contends that the question of what it “concealed” to customers cannot be resolved on a class-wide basis because “public knowledge about the defect varied throughout the relevant class period.” However, in the class certification order Judge Lawson observed that GM’s argument was “disingenuous considering the defendant’s recent efforts to conceal from public disclosure vast portions of the record offered by the plaintiffs to show the existence of the defect and the defendant’s historical knowledge of the same.”
The states certified include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.
A second action regarding GM vehicles with 8L transmissions is also underway in Battle v. General Motors, LLC, 2:22-cv-108783. That case features 8L vehicles with harsh shifts made after March 1, 2019 (MY19 to MY22), when GM replaced the automatic transmission fluid that caused the shudder problem.
The plaintiffs are also represented by Theodore J. Leopold, Doug McNamara and Karina Puttieva, of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, Russell D. Paul of Berger Montague PC, Melissa L. Troutner of Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP, Tarek Zohdy of Capstone Law APC, E. Powell Miller of The Miller Law Firm, Steven Calamusa of Gordon & Partners PA and Gretchen Freeman Cappio of Keller Rohrback L.L. P.
###
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a premier U.S. plaintiffs’ law firm, handling high-profile and often precedent-setting litigation, including consumer protection and product liability litigation. With over 100 attorneys across the country, Cohen Milstein has offices in Boston, MA, Chicago, IL, Minneapolis, MN, New York, NY, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Philadelphia, PA, Raleigh, NC, Washington, DC. For additional information please call (202) 408-4600.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Media Contact: cohenmilstein@berlinrosen.com
WASHINGTON, DC – Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, one of the nation’s leading plaintiffs’ law firms, has announced its expansion into Massachusetts and Minnesota with the opening of offices in Boston and Minneapolis. This expansion allows the firm to further serve client needs across practices and act as local counsel in both states.
Cohen Milstein’s Boston office opens with the following in residence: Daniel H. Silverman, a partner in the Antitrust practice who prosecutes class actions on behalf of consumers, small businesses, and employees; Donna M. Evans, of counsel in the Antitrust practice, who has tried numerous cases to verdict, including obtaining, as part of a trial team, one of the largest plaintiff jury verdicts in Massachusetts Superior Court; and Richard E. Lorant , director of institutional client relations in the Securities & Investor Protection practice, who keeps clients apprised of legal and regulatory developments that may impact their funds and fund management.
The Minneapolis team includes experienced lawyers who have focused their careers on bringing justice to employees through ERISA class actions: partner Mary J. Bortscheller, an experienced litigator, who in addition to ERISA, has experience in antitrust and consumer protection class actions; Kai Richter, of counsel, who brings extensive trial and appellate experience in ERISA class action litigation in federal courts across the country; and Jacob Schutz, an associate who represent the interests of employees, retirees, plan participants and beneficiaries in ERISA class-action lawsuits.
“This is an exciting time at Cohen Milstein as we expand our footprint and identify new opportunities for growth,” said Steven J. Toll, Cohen Milstein’s managing partner. “Establishing these new offices is in direct response to demand for our expertise and strengthens our ability to fight for justice in jurisdictions across the country.”
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a national leader in plaintiff-side class action litigation. One of the premier law firms in the country handling major complex lawsuits, Cohen Milstein has more than 100 attorneys in offices in Boston, Chicago, Minneapolis, New York, Palm Beach Gardens, Philadelphia, Raleigh, and Washington, DC.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Media Contact: cohenmilstein@berlinrosen.com
WASHINGTON, DC – Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, one of the nation’s leading plaintiffs’ law firms, has named Christopher J. Bateman, Molly J. Bowen, Brian Corman, Alison Deich, and Eric A. Kafka as the firm’s newest partners, effective January 1, 2023.
Christopher J. Bateman, a member of the Antitrust practice, is largely focused on antitrust schemes in the financial markets and is currently engaged in litigation against dozens of Wall Street banks alleging they colluded to manipulate and prevent the modernization of several of the largest financial markets in the world. This includes the $1.7 trillion stock lending market and the Interest Rate Swaps market – both critical to a strong global economy.
Prior to joining Cohen Milstein, Mr. Bateman was a law clerk for the Honorable Naomi Reice Buchwald of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Mr. Bateman received his B.A., cum laude, from Dartmouth College in 2005. He received his J.D., cum laude, from Harvard Law School in 2014, where he was an Article Selection Editor for the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review.
Molly J. Bowen, a member of the Securities Litigation & Investor Protection practice, played an instrumental role in high-profile shareholder derivative actions against the boards of directors at Alphabet and Pinterest, resulting in historic settlements involving corporate governance reforms and financial commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives to address claims of systemic discrimination. Ms. Bowen is presently involved in litigation against Wells Fargo and its violation of federal consent orders following widespread consumer fraud scandals.
Prior to pursuing private practice, Ms. Bowen was a law clerk to the Honorable Karen Nelson Moore of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Ms. Bowen received her B.A., magna cum laude from Macalester College in 2007. She received her J.D., summa cum laude, graduating first in her class, from Washington University School of Law in 2013, where she served as the Articles Editor for the Washington University Law Review.
Brian Corman, a member of the Civil Rights & Employment practice, helps spearhead the firm’s fair housing litigation efforts, representing fair housing organizations, tenant unions, and those who have been unlawfully denied housing or otherwise discriminated against. He also focuses on employment and wage and hour class actions.
Following law school, Mr. Corman clerked for the Honorable Harry Pregerson of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. He was then a District of Columbia Bar Association Pro Bono Fellow at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
Mr. Corman received his B.A., summa cum laude, from Columbia University in 2010. Mr. Corman received J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law in 2013, where he was an editor of the California Law Review.
Alison Deich, a member of the Antitrust practice, is engaged in several class actions against some of the largest poultry producers in the United States for their alleged collusion in wage suppression and price fixing. Ms. Deich also plays a principal role in Thompson v. Trump (D.D.C.) which addresses former President Trump’s immunity claims regarding his role in the January 6th insurrection.
Prior to joining Cohen Milstein, Ms. Deich clerked for the Honorable Cornelia Pillard of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. She also clerked for the Honorable Katherine Polk Failla of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, as well as the Honorable Goodwin Liu of the California Supreme Court.
Ms. Deich received her B.A., with highest distinction, from the University of Virginia in 2010. Ms. Deich received her J.D., magna cum laude, from Harvard Law School in 2014.
Eric A. Kafka, a member of the Consumer Protection practice, represents plaintiffs in false advertising, data breach, privacy, and product liability class actions. He has a principal role in several high-profile unfair business practices class actions against Facebook involving its alleged inflation of advertising metrics, which are influential to customer purchasing decisions. Mr. Kafka is also leading a false advertising class action against Reckitt Benckiser related to its Woolite laundry detergent products.
Mr. Kafka received his B.A. from Yale University in 2008 and his J.D. from Columbia Law School in 2014.
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a national leader in plaintiff-side class action litigation. As one of the premier law firms in the country handling major complex lawsuits, Cohen Milstein, with more than 100 attorneys, has offices in Washington, DC; Chicago, IL; New York, New York; Philadelphia, PA; Palm Beach Gardens, FL; and Raleigh, NC. For more information about the firm, visit cohenmilstein.com or call (202) 408-4600.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact:
Tess Roy, cohenmilstein@berlinrosen.com, 561-596-6443
Trading data shows that seven preeminent market makers engaged in market manipulation via spoofing to drive down Northwest Biotherapeutics’ stock prices as the company worked to raise funds to bring breakthrough cancer treatments to market
NEW YORK, NY – Today, Northwest Biotherapeutics (OTCQB: NWBO) filed a lawsuit against some of the largest and most influential market makers in the world, including Citadel Securities LLC, Canaccord Genuity LLC, G1 Execution Services LLC (a subsidiary of Susquehanna International Group), GTS Securities LLC, Virtu Americas LLC (including Knight Securities), Instinet LLC, and Score Priority Corp, alleging repeated manipulation of the company’s stock over five years.
Northwest Biotherapeutics, a clinical stage biotechnology company focused on the development of DCVax® personalized cancer vaccines, is alleging that these market makers have been engaging in a deceptive market manipulation tactic known as spoofing, which involves placing huge quantities of sell orders to fool the market into devaluing the company’s stock so the market makers can buy at a lower price. The market makers then immediately cancel the sell orders so they can reap profits, in this case to the dismay of current and future cancer patients, as well as at the expense of Northwest Biotherapeutics and its investors. This alleged illegal trading behavior has made it significantly more difficult for the company to raise the funds necessary to bring their cancer treatment to market, where the company believes it has the potential to extend the lives of thousands of patients.
“It’s already underhanded to engage in market manipulation, but to do so at the expense of cancer patients, some of whom have no other treatments to place their hopes on, is unconscionable,” said Laura Posner, Partner at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC. “We’re looking forward to holding these market makers responsible for the harm they have caused, and bringing critical and necessary transparency to these markets.”
Based on the detailed data presented in the complaint, one of the most egregious examples of this behavior occurred on May 10, 2022, at the very moment the topline breakthrough results of the Phase 3 clinical trial of DCVax-L to treat glioblastoma, the most common and aggressive form of brain cancer, were being announced at the prestigious New York Academy of Sciences medical conference. Despite the presentation of significant positive data, the company alleges that during and after the announcement the defendants engaged in extensive spates of spoofing, forcing the company’s stock price down. In a market free from manipulation, the market response should have been strongly positive, not dramatically negative, in response to the positive news. Instead, the result was a $1.6 billion loss in market cap, with the share price dropping from the $2.05 high on May 9 to a low of 36.4 cents on May 10, 2022—a staggering decline of 82%.
Earlier this month, Northwest Biotherapeutics announced the results of this innovative clinical trial for DCVax-L in the prestigious JAMA Oncology journal in a peer reviewed article authored by over 70 brain surgeons and oncologists. The trial results showed that the vaccine was associated with a statistically significant and clinically meaningful life extension for the first time in many years in both newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma, with the potential to more than double 5-year survival, and with almost no serious adverse event side effects. The company believes that this breakthrough vaccine technology may also pave the way for treatments in patients suffering from multiple types of solid tumor cancers.
The spoofing episodes against the company are alleged to have taken place repeatedly over a nearly five-year stretch, sometimes multiple times a day. Northwest Biotherapeutics alleges that it sold over 49 million shares at manipulated and devalued prices as a result of the market makers’ actions. The company believes that the market makers directly impacted the price of Northwest Biotherapeutics’ shares in the market by repeatedly and brazenly manipulating the market through their spoofing, causing Northwest Biotherapeutics to suffer significant losses as it sold millions of shares at artificially depressed prices and was slowed in bringing its encouraging drugs to market.
Northwest Biotherapeutics is represented by national law firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC.
###
About Northwest Biotherapeutics
Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc is a clinical-stage biotechnology company specializing in developing cutting-edge cancer vaccines that are designed to treat a wide range of solid tumor cancers more effectively than the current treatments on the market and without the side effects of chemotherapy. The company has a broad platform technology for DCVax® dendritic cell-based vaccines, including DCVax®-L for operable tumors and DCVax®-Direct for inoperable tumors. The company’s proprietary manufacturing technology allows efficient and cost-effective production of these innovative vaccines, with the full set of multi-year doses produced in one manufacturing batch and then stored frozen in single doses, making the treatment “off the shelf” throughout the treatment regimen while also being fully personalized.
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is recognized as one of the premier law firms in the country handling major, complex plaintiff-side litigation. With more than 100 attorneys, Cohen Milstein has offices in Washington, D.C.; Chicago, Ill.; New York, N.Y.; Palm Beach Gardens, Fla.; Philadelphia, Pa.; and Raleigh, N.C. For additional information, visit www.cohenmilstein.com or call 202.408.4600.
Disclaimer
Statements made in this news release that are not historical facts, including statements concerning future treatment of patients using DCVax and future clinical trials, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as “expect,” “believe,” “intend,” “design,” “plan,” “continue,” “may,” “will,” “anticipate,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. We cannot guarantee that we actually will achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statement. Specifically, there are a number of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated, such as risks related to the Company’s ability to achieve timely performance of third parties, risks related to whether the Company’s products will demonstrate safety and efficacy, risks related to the Company’s ongoing ability to raise additional capital, and other risks included in the Company’s Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings. Additional information on the foregoing risk factors and other factors, including Risk Factors, which could affect the Company’s results, is included in its SEC filings. Finally, there may be other factors not mentioned above or included in the Company’s SEC filings that may cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statement. The Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events or developments, except as required by securities laws.
Attack Victims of Pres. Erdoğan’s Security Detail Will Have Their Day in Court
WASHINGTON DC – Today, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear the Republic of Turkey’s petition to review the unanimous July 27, 2021 opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which upheld the district court’s 2020 ruling denying Turkey’s bid for immunity for the vicious attack by its security personnel on peaceful protestors May 16, 2017 at Sheridan Circle in Washington D.C.
Turkey’s immunity arguments have now failed at every level of the U.S. court system.
On May 16, 2017, demonstrators were peacefully expressing opposition to human rights abuses by the Republic of Turkey against the Kurds, an ethnic minority facing persecution in that country, when Turkish security officials, several of whom were members of President Erdoğan’s personal security detail, pushed past U.S. law enforcement officers to attack and silence the demonstrators, repeatedly punching and kicking defenseless people. One woman was beaten so severely she lost consciousness and had a seizure. The attack was captured on video and widely covered by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and other national and international news and media outlets.
The lawsuit, Kasim Kurd, et al. v. The Republic of Turkey (D.D.C.) sought to hold Turkey accountable for this outrageous violation of United States, District of Colombia, and international law. At the Supreme Court, the case was consolidated with Usoyan v. The Republic of Turkey. Both cases were represented by Allison Zieve of Public Citizen at the Supreme Court stage.
On January 25, 2021, Agnieszka Fryszman, counsel for Plaintiffs at Cohen Milstein, argued the case to a three-judge panel at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which later unanimously agreed with the District Court that Turkey was not entitled to foreign sovereign immunity for its attack on the protestors. The United States Government submitted a brief in September recommending that certiorari be denied. In addition to Cohen Milstein, the plaintiffs are represented by Michael Tigar, Professor Emeritus of American University Washington College of Law, and Mark Sullivan and Joshua Colangelo-Bryan of Dorsey & Whitney LLP.
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a premier U.S. plaintiffs’ law firm, handling high-profile and often precedent-setting litigation, including cross-border Human Rights litigation. With over 100 attorneys across the country, Cohen Milstein has offices in Washington, DC, Chicago, IL, New York, NY, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Philadelphia, PA, and Raleigh, NC. For additional information, please visit www.cohenmilstein.com or call (202) 408-4600.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Firm still signing up Southern Company Pension Plan participants for class action
Washington, DC – Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, a premier plaintiffs’ class action law firm, represents retirees of the Southern Company Pension Plan (“the Plan”) in a class action lawsuit against Southern Company and its pension plan administrators. Plaintiffs allege that Southern Company, the parent company to Southern Company Gas, Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, AGL Resources, Nicor Gas, and Virginia Natural Gas, among other utility companies, is shortchanging their retirees or their surviving spouse in violation of the actuarial equivalence requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).
Plaintiffs seek to recover amounts due to married retirees and their surviving spouses and to reform the Southern Company Pension Plan to ensure full compliance with the protections of ERISA.
The lawsuit, Drummond, et al. v. Southern Company, Inc., et al. was filed before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on September 2, 2022.
“This is a really troubling issue for the Southern Company retirees who are being shortchanged and forced to live on less retirement income every month,” said Michelle Yau, chair of Cohen Milstein’s Employee Benefits/ERISA practice.
Under Ms. Yau’s leadership, Cohen Milstein is presently engaged in similar litigation against AT&T, CITGO Petroleum, and Luxottica. Both AT&T and CITGO have passed the motion to dismiss stage. In June, the firm filed for class certification in AT&T. To read more about joint and survivor annuities, see “Is Your Retirement Plan Imposing a Marriage Penalty? What You Need to Know.”
Claims in Southern Company: Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that Southern Company and the pension plan administrators used outdated pension plan mortality tables that resulted in the miscalculation of the joint and survivor annuity paid to some Southern Company retirees, and in unreasonable and excessive charges called “QPSA charges” related to pre-retirement death benefits.
Impacted Individuals: Cohen Milstein is actively signing up individuals who retired from Southern Company or one of its subsidiaries on or after November 1, 2016.
Next Steps: If Southern Company Pension Plan participants believe they may have been impacted, they should contact their legal counsel or contact: Michelle C. Yau, Partner (email) or at 202.408.4600.
About Michelle C. Yau
Michelle Yau, chair of the Cohen Milstein’s Employee Benefits/ERISA practice is licensed to practice in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. Her practice is limited to federal legal matters, such as the federal pension laws that pertain to the Southern Company. Ms. Yau’s experience of protecting retirement assets and insight into complex financial transactions and actuarial issues is informed by her Wall Street and Department of Labor experience. In 2021, she was named Law360’s “Employee Benefits MVP – Benefits.”
About Cohen Milstein’s Employee Benefits/ ERISA Practice
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a premier class action law firm, handling high-profile and often precedent-setting cases on behalf of plaintiffs. We have filed numerous ERISA class actions alleging illegal underpayment of pension benefits on behalf of married retirees against large corporations such as AT&T, CITGO Petroleum, and Luxottica. Cohen Milstein was named Law360’s “Employee Benefits/ERISA Practice Group of the Year” in 2020 and 2021. For additional information, please visit cohenmilstein.com or call (202) 408-4600.
Contact:
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone: 888-240-0775 (Toll Free) or 202-408-4600
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.
The decision overturns a lower court ruling and reinstates claims against Chiquita in a historic lawsuit over the company’s role in funding paramilitary groups in Colombia.
Atlanta, Ga.–Today, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that several families suing Chiquita Brands International for its role in funding paramilitary death squads in Colombia can proceed toward a jury trial.
The Eleventh Circuit reversed a September 2019 summary judgment decision by a federal judge in Florida, who had ruled the victims lacked admissible evidence showing that their family members were murdered by the paramilitaries. In reversing the district court, the Eleventh Circuit found substantial evidence of paramilitary involvement in the killings.
EarthRights International initially filed the suit in 2007 and represents families of hundreds of victims murdered, tortured, and injured by the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), an outlawed paramilitary organization that Chiquita admitted to illegally funding.
EarthRights General Counsel Marco Simons issued the following statement:
“Today’s order was a milestone in this historic lawsuit. The families have been waiting years to have their day in court despite strenuous efforts by Chiquita to have the case dismissed. Now that the appellate court has reinstated the case, the families are looking forward to a jury trial.
“Chiquita has long admitted that it illegally funded the AUC. This ruling finally gives our clients the chance to show to the court, and the world, what everyone in Colombia knows: that the AUC used Chiquita’s support to engage in brutal atrocities against civilians in the banana-growing regions of Colombia. There is overwhelming evidence that the AUC murdered thousands of Colombians, including our clients’ family members there.
“Much of this evidence has been developed over more than a decade through the Justice and Peace process in Colombia. The district court rejected evidence from that process, and we are relieved that the appellate court has appropriately considered the results of Colombia’s own justice system and overturned the erroneous decision of the lower court.
“Perhaps the most significant aspect of this ruling is that it accepts the admission of circumstantial evidence and expert testimony to show that murders that occurred at times and places where the AUC was in control and in a manner that fits with the AUC’s methods and motives, to show that the murders were committed by the AUC. That conclusion will apply to hundreds if not thousands of the victims in this case.”
Agnieszka Fryszman, plaintiffs’ counsel at Cohen Milstein added:
“We are very pleased that the Eleventh Circuit carefully and thoroughly evaluated the district court’s approach to Plaintiffs evidence – in 104 pages – and unanimously reversed the lower court’s summary judgment decision. This is a very important case for corporate accountability. Chiquita has already admitted it paid over a million dollars to the AUC, a paramilitary group designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the United States. The Eleventh Circuit has now found that the Plaintiffs presented sufficient admissible evidence to show that the AUC killed their loved ones. After years of briefing these issues, we look forward to presenting our evidence to a jury and seeking justice for our clients.”
Background
For nearly a decade in the 1990s and early 2000s, Chiquita Brands International made regular payments to the AUC, totaling more than $1.7 million. In turn, the AUC engaged in a campaign of violence against communities in Colombia’s banana-growing regions, including trade unions, political opponents, and Indigenous advocates. In 2001, the U.S. government classified the AUC as a terrorist organization. Chiquita pled guilty to a federal crime for funding the AUC and paid a $25 million fine to the U.S. government but has not yet compensated the families of the AUC’s victims.
Thousands of victims, represented by several groups of lawyers, have filed suit against Chiquita in federal courts across the country; those suits were consolidated and are being heard in federal district court for the Southern District of Florida, in West Palm Beach. The cases for a dozen killings were selected as “bellwether” cases to proceed as examples. The district court ruled in September 2019 that these bellwether cases could not proceed to trial because the plaintiffs had not submitted sufficient evidence that their family members had been murdered by the AUC.
These bellwether cases include two of EarthRights’ clients, known by the pseudonyms John Doe 7 and Jane Doe 7. John Doe 7’s son was murdered by AUC paramilitaries, and the local paramilitary commander admitted this to John Doe 7 himself. Jane Doe 7’s husband, a labor activist, was also murdered by the AUC; his murder fits a pattern of the AUC targeting union leaders. The court of appeals found that both plaintiffs had submitted sufficient evidence on this issue to proceed to trial.
EarthRights’ co-counsel includes Paul L. Hoffman of Schonbrun Seplow Harris Hoffman & Zeldes LLP, who argued the appeal; Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC; and attorneys Judith Brown Chomsky, Anthony DiCaprio, and Arturo Carrillo.
Contact:
Kate Fried, EarthRights International
(202) 257.0057
kate.fried@earthrights.org
After 20 Years of Litigation, Victims’ Stories of Abuses by Security Forces Finally Told
WASHINGTON DC – A federal judge today released a detailed and pointed 86-page opinion that largely denied ExxonMobil Corporation’s motion for summary judgment in a long-running human rights lawsuit, brought by eleven Indonesian citizens. This decision paves the way for trial in the hotly contested case.
The Plaintiffs, represented by Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, allege that ExxonMobil contracted to use Indonesian soldiers to provide security at ExxonMobil’s natural gas facility in Aceh, Indonesia. The Court ruled that Plaintiffs eyewitness testimony and ExxonMobil’s own internal documents would allow a reasonable jury to find that these security personnel subjected the Plaintiffs or their loved ones to assault, torture, extrajudicial killing, and other abuses.
In issuing the ruling, Judge Royce C. Lamberth’s 86-page opinion pointedly stated, “With only limited exceptions, defendants remaining arguments – about causation, quantifiable loss, ExxonMobil’s liability, and due process – are entirely meritless.” (Pg. 3 – 4) The Court repeatedly found that ExxonMobil’s characterizations of the evidence was “wrong” or “simply wrong.” (P 37, 45, 46, 72)
“We are gratified that the Court was moved by the evidence we presented from more than a dozen eyewitnesses and agreed that this important human rights case against ExxonMobil should move forward to trial,” said Agnieszka Fryszman, attorney for the plaintiffs and chair of Cohen Milstein’s Human Rights Practice. “This case has been up and down to the Supreme Court and tied up in pretrial litigation for over 20 years. This is a big turning point for our clients who have stuck it out for so long in the hopes of obtaining justice. We look forward to presenting our evidence to a jury.”
The opinion details that ExxonMobil executives were aware of the Indonesian military’s reputation. For example, during this period, atrocities committed by the Indonesian military were widely reported in international press, including by Business Week’s Singapore Bureau. “Defendants’ executives have acknowledged their awareness of the military’s human rights abuses.” (Pg. 5)
The Court also found that the record reflects ExxonMobil’s increasing involvement and influence in the military’s security operations. By December 1999, the soldiers were “dedicated exclusively” to providing security for these operations. (Pg. 8) By late 2000, approximately 1,000 soldiers were assigned to defendants’ Indonesian oil operations. (Pg. 9)
Most importantly, the Court devoted the bulk of its opinion to the evidence presented in support of ExxonMobil’s liability for each Plaintiffs’ injury, explaining that under Indonesian law (which is the law governing the claims):
“For the direct liability claims, there must be sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that soldiers who harmed plaintiffs were the same ones that defendants negligently hired, retained, or supervised. For the indirect liability claims, there must be sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that 1) “an employment or representation relationship” existed between the soldier and defendants (or that the soldier was in facet assigned to guard defendants’ operations), and 2) that were is a “functional connection” between the soldier’s wrongful act and the work that they were directed to perform.”” (Pg. 33)
Examples of Plaintiff testimonies are summarized below.
- Jane Doe I alleged she was assaulted in 2001 when she was eight months pregnant by a soldier who, among other things “forced her to jump up and down repeatedly.” (Pg. 33) She identified the soldier as one of the soldiers assigned to ExxonMobil, and her testimony was corroborated by a witness who waited daily for the school bus outside ExxonMobil’s facility and could confirm identifying information. (p.33) The Court found that “a reasonable jury could conclude that the soldier was one who was tasked with providing security for defendants” and that there was a sufficient “connection between the soldier’s wrongdoing and his employment relationship with defendants.”
- Jane Doe II alleged that her husband was shot in 2000 while working in his rice paddy by members of ExxonMobil’s security personnel. The Court wrote “Defendants argue there ‘is no evidence’ connecting the shooting to defendants. They are wrong.” (Pg. 37)
- Jane Doe III’s husband “was a traveling fish merchant who regularly stopped” at a market “where Exxon’s Bachelor Camp was located.” (Pg. 44) She presented evidence from an eyewitness who had worked at ExxonMobil’s “Bachelor Camp” facility and who operated a small kiosk nearby. After reviewing testimony about the actions by guards at Bachelor Camp and the death of John Doe IX, the Court ruled that “[a] reasonable jury could find that the soldiers who killed John Doe IX were the same soldiers assigned to guard Bachelor Camp” and “that defendants negligently hired and supervised.” (Pg. 44)
- Jane Doe IV presented testimony from two eyewitnesses who recognized the soldiers who shot her husband as he worked in his rice paddy as the same soldiers at ExxonMobil’s gate who had often bullied the boys on their way to and from school (p46). The Court’s opinion explains that “eyewitnesses recognized the soldiers from Cluster 4” (where ExxonMobil was operating), “where they worked inside and outside the fence.” (Pg. 46). Based on its review of the evidence, the Court ruled that “[a] reasonable jury could find that the soldiers who murdered Jane Doe IV’s husband were the same soldiers that defendants negligently hired and supervised.” (Pg. 47)
- Jane Doe V: The Court cited testimony that “[s]ometime in January 2001, John Doe I went missing. Eventually, after several days, soldiers returned John Doe I to his home. When he arrived home, John Doe I was wearing only his underwear, his hand had been cut off, and he was missing an eye.” (Pg. 47) After reviewing evidence of statements by John Doe I that he was taken “by soldiers working at Point A” (a central location for ExxonMobil’s operations), the Court ruled that “a reasonable jury could conclude that the soldiers who abducted and tortured John Doe worked at Point A and provided security for defendants.”
- John Doe VII “alleged that, in January 2001, he was `accosted by members of ExxonMobil’s security personnel’ who took him inside of a warehouse at an ExxonMobil-operated facility and beat him severely before releasing him the next day.” (Pg. 69) Plaintiffs presented evidence from two eyewitnesses, including one who was held with him overnight by ExxonMobil security in a warehouse used by ExxonMobil. (Pg. 70) The Court noted that the witnesses “even identified the specific soldiers by name” and found the Defendants contentions that there was no “firsthand evidence linking his injuries to defendants” to be “meritless.” (Pg. 69)
Other Case Background
During his confirmation, Justice Kavanaugh described the ExxonMobil case as one of the ten most significant cases heard during his tenure on the D.C. Circuit.
About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC is a premier U.S. plaintiffs’ law firm, handling high-profile and often precedent-setting litigation, including cross-border Human Rights litigation. With over 100 attorneys across the country, Cohen Milstein has offices in Washington, DC, Chicago, IL, New York, NY, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Philadelphia, PA, and Raleigh, NC. For additional information, please visit www.cohenmilstein.com or call (202) 408-4600.