Law360: NY Appellate Court Reverses Times Square Hotel Ruling
December 6, 2022 – Law360 reports that Brewer client M&C New York LLC, owner of the former Novotel Times Square Hotel, has prevailed in its appeal of a lower court ruling that dismissed a breach of contract lawsuit against the hotel's former manager, hotel operator Accor Management US Inc.
According to the report, "The appellate court favored hotel owner M&C New York (Times Square) LLC's argument that it had complied with the provisions of its hotel management agreement with operator Accor Management US Inc. when it issued an April 2019 notice of default due to the manager's alleged negligent accounting, misuse of hotel funds, unsupported payments and fee overcharges. The appeals court also rejected Accor's claims that it was protected by a safe harbor provision in section 14.3 of the hotel management agreement."
Counsel for M&C New York, William A. Brewer III, told Law360 the decision paves the way for a trial, which is expected to shed light on Accor's management of the former Novotel Times Square.
“This case underscores the principles that govern the relationship between owners and management companies,” says Brewer. “Our client believes Accor sought protections to which it was not entitled – and failed in its obligations to manage the property in owner’s best interest. This case is a cautionary tale for owners throughout the Accor system, and we are eager to proceed to trial.”
Read the report (subscription required).
Houston ABC-13 Reports on Brewer Storefront Voting Rights Act Case
November 10, 2022 – ABC 13 Eyewitness News in Houston reported on a Voting Rights Act lawsuit brought by Brewer Storefront against Pearland Independent School District. Brewer Storefront is the community service affiliate of the Brewer law firm.
The report notes that two parents, Storefront clients Dona Kim Murphey and Jessica Garcia Shafer, are suing the school district, challenging the at-large election system. The report adds that the lawsuit argues the election system denies fair representation to voters of color in the diverse district. The complaint claims that since 2018, 11 minority candidates have had an unsuccessful bid in the school board elections, including the plaintiffs.
The news station interviewed Brewer Partner William Brewer about the case. “We believe this election system violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, because it enables the majority to discriminate against, frankly, a very healthy minority," Brewer said.
The complaint in part states that, “"In practice, the at-large system discourages minority or minority-preferred candidates from seeking office, because it effectively functions as a white-controlled referendum on all candidates. In PISD, a bloc of white voters controls all seven trustee positions.”
To read more, click here.
Best Lawyers Recognizes Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors for Commercial Litigation
November 8, 2022 – Best Lawyers recognized Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors in its “U.S. News-Best Lawyers” 2023 “Best Law Firms” awards. The firm was recognized in both Dallas and New York for Commercial Litigation in Tier 3.
Rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys, and the review of additional information provided by law firms during the submission process.
Eligibility is based on firms that have at least one lawyer who has been recognized in the previous edition of Best Lawyers. Firm Partner William Brewer has been recognized in the area of Commercial Litigation since 2007. The Best Law Firms ranking process involves a submission process, ranking by tiers, and then award notification.
Lawsuit Claims Pearland ISD Electoral System Violates Voting Rights Act of 1965
November 3, 2022 — Brewer Storefront filed suit in federal court on behalf of plaintiffs Jessica Garcia Shafer and Dona Kim Murphey against the Pearland Independent School District (PISD) and its trustees, alleging that the school district’s election system violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it denies fair representation to voters of color.
Filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Galveston Division, the lawsuit claims that the school district’s at-large voting system denies Hispanic, African American and Asian voters a fair opportunity to elect school board representatives of their choice. The Storefront is the community service legal affiliate of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors.
The lawsuit alleges that, based on the district’s demographics, one would expect that at least one Latino, African American or Asian school board member could be elected. Yet, all seven school board members are white.
“Our clients believe the at-large election system used by Pearland ISD denies citizens of color a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing,” says William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer Storefront and lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “The at-large voting scheme utilized by the school district is pernicious and unconstitutional. Our clients believe the system should be abandoned – to enable a more inclusive future and where every citizen’s voice is valued in the process of electing school district board members.”
Home to more than 21,000 students, PISD is a richly diverse school district. As of the 2020-21 school year, students of color formed nearly 67% of the total student body, according to the Texas Education Agency (“TEA”) 2020-21 Texas Academic Performance Reports (TAPR). About 33% of all PISD students were white, 36.8% Hispanic, 11.1% Asian, 14.9% African American, and 3.9% two or more races.
Under the current electoral system, school board members are elected at large. Candidates run for “places” but do not represent any specific geographic area. The lawsuit claims the at-large system rewards white voters for voting as a bloc and denies political opportunity to non-white voters.
Shafer, who is Hispanic, and Murphey, who is Asian, both previously ran for the PISD school board and lost – Shafer in 2020 and 2021, and Murphey in 2019. They are also mothers whose children attend PISD schools. Ms. Murphey holds an MD PhD and Ms. Shafer is a trained epidemiologist. They both lost to white candidates who allegedly benefited from the at-large voting system.
In referring to PISD’s at-large election system, the lawsuit states: “In practice the at-large system discourages minority or minority-preferred candidates from seeking office because it effectively functions as a white-controlled referendum on all candidates. In PISD, a bloc of white voters controls all seven Trustee positions.”
The lawsuit alleges that PISD has a history of minority candidates running for the board and losing to white candidates. Since just 2018, 11 minority candidates have run for the board and lost.
According to the lawsuit, the numbers of Hispanic, African American and Asian voters are sufficiently large and geographically compact such that at least one single-member electoral district could be created in which voters of color are a majority.
The lawsuit says, “The chilling effects of the at-large system empowers the current Board, which fails to reflect the composition of the real stakeholders in the public-school system.” The lawsuit adds, “PISD’s discriminatory voting system is a relic of the District’s past and must be changed.”
The Storefront has successfully challenged violations of the Voting Rights Act on behalf of other communities of interest in previous actions.
The Storefront successfully resolved Voting Rights Act cases with the Richardson Independent School District in January 2019, the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District in 2015, and the Grand Prairie Independent School District in 2014. All districts now utilize remodeled voting systems. The Storefront also secured trial victories in Voting Rights Act cases against the Irving Independent School District in 2014, the City of Farmers Branch in 2012, and the City of Irving in 2009. Those lawsuits paved the way for the formation of new voting systems and the election of minority candidates.
Mr. Brewer is joined in representing plaintiffs by Blaine Adams, an associate in the firm’s Dallas office.
Law360: NRA Seeks 2nd Circ. Rehearing In Free Speech Dispute
October 11, 2022 - Law360 reports that Brewer client, the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), is asking a "Second Circuit panel for a rehearing after the court found that an investigation into insurers partnered with the NRA and statements by a former New York official advising NRA-affiliated businesses to assess their reputational risks did not violate the gun advocacy group's constitutional rights."
The NRA filed a petition for rehearing en banc on October 6, 2022, asserting that the three-judge panel that overturned its free speech win ignored "clearly-established law that selective enforcement regimes violate the First Amendment." The panel's decision reversed a district court ruling, resulting in the dismissal of individual claims against former Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo.
"The NRA believes, as do most First Amendment scholars, that a government official should not be allowed to target her political enemies and then weaponize the power of her office against that group. The concept, which is unremarkable, restrains 'viewpoint discrimination,'" William A. Brewer III, counsel for the NRA, said in a statement to Law360.
"Numerous legal experts and constitutional scholars join the NRA in recognizing the First Amendment forbids such action. The association will continue to pursue this matter in support of its members and their constitutional freedoms," Brewer said.
Read the report (subscription required).
First Amendment Watch Reports on Second Circuit Dismissal of NRA Claims Against NY State Financial Regulator
October 4, 2022 – First Amendment Watch, a project of Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute at New York University, published an article chronicling the NRA's First Amendment lawsuit against former New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo. On September 22, 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed a lower court decision and dismissed claims against Vullo individually.
The case stems from the 2018 “blacklisting campaign” against the NRA, in which, the NRA alleges, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Vullo attempted to coerce banks and other financial institutions from doing business with the NRA. As is noted by First Amendment Watch, a host of legal experts, including the ACLU, sided with the NRA and recognized the implications of such actions.
As reported, NRA attorney William A. Brewer III of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors described the Second Circuit decision as “unfortunate” because Vullo never sat for a deposition to share what may have been happening behind closed doors.
Brewer further told First Amendment Watch that the issue at hand is that government officials should not single out opposing viewpoints and then use their power to silence them. “He [Cuomo] clearly targeted his longtime adversary, the NRA, and enlisted Vullo,” Brewer said.
Although the NRA’s claims against Cuomo are not encompassed by this ruling, the decision will, the NRA believes, encourage exactly the corrupting effects scholars have warned against.
The NRA, according to Brewer, is weighing all of its options and “anxiously wants to get the case to trial against former Gov. Cuomo.” First Amendment Watch reports that, in regard to this decision, the NRA could either file a motion to rehear en banc, meaning the entire court reconsiders the case, or accept the decision and file a writ of certiorari.
“I think there’s little or no chance that the NRA will not pursue one of those options given how important this precedent is,” Brewer said. If none of them is successful, he believes “there’s a significant likelihood that the NRA would take this up to the Supreme Court, where the NRA is no stranger.”
Read the report here.
Brewer Storefront Voting Rights Lawsuit Moves Forward
September 28, 2022 – The Brewer Storefront announced that its Voting Rights Act lawsuit against the Lewisville Independent School District (LISD) is moving forward. On September 26, U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant for the Eastern District of Texas denied a motion by LISD to dismiss the lawsuit brought against LISD by Brewer Storefront client Paige Dixon – paving the way for trial.
Brewer Storefront is the community-service legal affiliate of the national litigation firm of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors.
Dixon brought the lawsuit against LISD and its trustees on April 12, 2022, alleging that the school district’s at-large election system violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it denies fair representation to voters of color. Dixon is African American and former candidate for the school board.
Judge Mazzant wrote that, “After reviewing the current complaint, and the arguments presented in briefing, the Court finds that Dixon has stated plausible claims for relief against Individual Defendants.”
With approximately 50,000 students, LISD is richly diverse. As of the 2020-21 school year, the student population was 37.6% white, 30.5% Hispanic, 15.5% Asian, and 11.6% African American, and 4.4% Two or More Races. Yet, there is only one minority trustee out of seven.
“We are pleased that Judge Mazzant has cleared the path so that this important case can move forward,” said William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer Storefront and lead counsel for Dixon. “Our client is eager to proceed to trial, and expose the pernicious and unconstitutional nature of this voting scheme.”
Under the current electoral system, school board members are elected at large. Candidates run for “places” but do not represent any specific geographic area. The lawsuit claims the at-large system rewards white voters for voting as a bloc and denies political opportunity to non-white voters.
The lawsuit refers to LISD’s at-large election system and the importance of school board trustees and states that, “Unfortunately, when the electoral process by which officials are chosen ‘stacks the deck’ against people of color such bodies cease to be ‘representative.’” According to the lawsuit, the numbers of Hispanic, African American and Asian voters are sufficiently large and geographically compact such that at least one single-member electoral district could be created in which voters of color are a majority.
The Storefront has an established track record in this form of public advocacy. It successfully resolved Voting Rights Act cases with the Richardson Independent School District in January 2019, the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District in 2015, and the Grand Prairie Independent School District in 2014. All districts now utilize remodeled voting systems. The Storefront also secured trial victories in Voting Rights Act cases against the Irving Independent School District in 2014, the City of Farmers Branch in 2012, and the City of Irving in 2009.
Those lawsuits paved the way for the formation of new voting systems and the election of minority candidates.
Brewer Comments on Ruling That Dismisses NRA Claims
September 23, 2022 – Law 360 and several other media outlets quoted William A. Brewer III in connection with recent developments regarding the NRA’s lawsuit against former New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) Superintendent Maria Vullo. A panel of three Democratic appointees in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed repeated holdings by the trial judge in the NRA’s First Amendment case against Vullo – and dismissed the claims against Vullo individually.
The case stems from the 2018 “blacklisting campaign” against the NRA, in which, the NRA alleges, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Vullo attempted to coerce banks and other financial institutions from doing business with the NRA.
The NRA is investigating its options, under belief that the Second Circuit’s decision misstates facts of the case and gravely weakens First Amendment protection for controversial speakers who wish to access financial markets.
Brewer told Law 360, "The Second Circuit's decision regarding the NRA's claims against Ms. Vullo misstates the facts, and offends the First Amendment. "[The decision] endorses a radical idea: that financial regulators can selectively punish businesses to advance 'public policy,' including 'social issues' such as gun control. This is a derogation of the First Amendment that should not prevail."
To read more, click here.