Gabriella Olivieri Publications Portfolio Annual Report - 2011 | Página 14

LEG A L DIVISIONS APPEALS CHIEF Leonard Koerner DEPUTY Francis Caputo The Appeals Division is responsible for nearly all appeals in matters litigated by the Law Department in State and federal court. Its cases involve virtually every area of substantive law, even some criminal law issues. Attorneys file approximately 725 briefs annually, and last year appeared in 22 appeals in the New York Court of Appeals—the State’s highest court. 11 charges; and the Rent Guidelines Board’s authority to approve certain supplemental rent increases for apartment renewal leases. Education Division attorneys successfully defended the City in an ongoing, longstanding challenge to the Department of Education’s (DOE’s) policy of banning worship services in public school buildings; a bid to halt the release of teacher evaluation reports under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL); a lawsuit alleging that the City had failed to use State funds earmarked for reducing school class sizes; and an effort to compel the DOE to reinstate costly yellow school bus service for middle school students living on Staten Island and part of Queens. PHOTO: HUDSON RIVER PARK NEAR PIERS 92 AND 94 Win in a Major Campaign Finance Case A federal appeals court ruled in the City’s favor in a highly important case challenging certain Campaign Finance Act provisions. Those provisions limit campaign contributions by individuals and entities having business dealings with the City, exclude such contributions from matching public funds, and expand the prohibition on corporate contributions to include partnerships, LLCs (limited liability corporations), and LLPs (limited liability partnerships). Signi?cantly, the win af?rms the City’s authority to restrict such campaign contributions. Land Use Division attorneys successfully defeated challenges to two major development projects planned for Manhattan. A State appellate panel rejected environmental challenges to the City’s determination to acquire and construct a large sanitation garage and salt-storage facility in TriBeCa, and the same Court also upheld the City’s approval of the redevelopment of Piers 92 and 94 along the Hudson River, as a midsized trade show facility. Employment and Bene?ts The Division prevailed in a major case involving the City’s authority to determine the size and composition of its workforce in the midst of budget constraints; a ?re?ghter’s attempt to secure an accident disability pension following injuries he incurred during a ?rehouse brawl; an attempt to compel the City to cover healthcare bene?ts for State Off Track Betting retirees with no guarantee of State reimbursement; a matter establishing that municipal unions cannot pursue arbitration and court challenges in tandem; and numerous individual claims by municipal employees against the City. Regulatory and Quality-of-Life Issues Division attorneys successfully defended the City’s restriction of billboards along arterial highways and within the view of public parks; the regulation of art vendors within City parks; the Taxi & Limousine Commission’s policy of suspending taxi drivers’ licenses when drivers are arrested on criminal Personal Injury Liability An appellate court reversed a $2.7 million verdict against the DOE for a high school student accidentally injured by a classmate while playing softball. A court also found for the City in a woman’s claim that the Parks Department was liable for injuries she incurred riding in Prospect Park on a horse rented from a private company. Criminal Justice Appeals attorneys defeated an inmate’s FOIL request for unredacted police reports containing the names and statements of witnesses who did not testify at his murder trial, and a lawsuit alleging that police had improperly entered the home of a youth who had stolen a computer. The Division also successfully represented the City in matters challenging aspects of its indigent defense policies. 16% The Appeals Division accounts for about 16 percent of the New York Court of Appeals’ civil docket. 12