CNBC Reports on Potency of NRA, Brewer Statement on Uvalde, Texas and Representation of Association
On May 27, 2022, CNBC published the report, “The National Rifle Association’s Lobbying Machine is Still Potent Despite Financial Woes That Reduced Its Clout.”
The article states that the NRA’s “financial filings and lobbying disclosures show the group still has the means” to advocate for Second Amendment freedom — and is expected to play an active role in the upcoming midterms.
The article notes that the NRA continues to have the “support of a key advisor that helped it weather its recent financial and legal troubles.”
Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, has represented the NRA since 2018 in connection with several legal and regulatory issues. As an example, in March, the firm and the NRA successfully defeated dissolution claims against the NRA by the New York Attorney General. The NYAG filed a lawsuit in August 2020 seeking to shut down the Association — an action that has drawn the rebuke of many legal experts and constitutional scholars, including the ACLU.
The article reports that the Brewer firm has no plans to stop representing the Association.
The firm said that it will “honor our commitments to the Association, its leadership, and millions of law-abiding members.”
Regarding the recent school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, the firm said in a statement, “This was an incomprehensible tragedy – the act of a deranged person. We extend our prayers and deepest sympathies to the victims, their families and this entire community. We also join others in the call to provide protection in our schools – to make them safe and secure.”
To read more, click here.
New York Law Journal, Others Report on NRA Victory
On March 4, 2022, a front-page article in the New York Law Journal, “Manhattan Judge Rejects NY AG’s Effort to Dissolve National Rifle Association,” reported that a ruling by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Joel Cohen dismissed New York Attorney General Letitia James’ effort to dissolve the organization.
The report noted that Cohen found that dissolving the NRA “could impinge, at least indirectly, on the free speech and assembly rights of millions of members” of the NRA.
The report added that NRA lead attorney William Brewer applauded the ruling, stating that, “This is a victory not only for the NRA, but all who believe in the right to free speech and association.”
The article follows positive reports from many news organizations, including the Associated Press, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, and the Daily Caller, among others. To read more in the NYLJ, click here.
Wall Street Journal Reports on NRA Legal Victory
On March 2, 2022, The Wall Street Journal reported that a state court judge dismissed the New York Attorney General’s effort to dissolve the National Rifle Association (NRA), finding that the state’s allegations did not prove the public harm required to impose a “corporate death penalty” on the NRA.
“We applaud the court’s recognition that dissolution is neither appropriate nor justified,” said William A. Brewer III, an attorney for the NRA. “We look forward to continuing the defense of the NRA—and proving that it acts in the best interests of its members and the Second Amendment freedoms in which they believe.”
The Wall Street Journal reported that the ruling by New York Supreme Court Judge Joel M. Cohen “represented a big win for the NRA.” The judge found that dissolving the NRA “could impinge, at least indirectly, on the free speech and assembly rights” of NRA members.
The NRA has been a New York nonprofit since its founding more than 150 years ago. The Journal reported that the NRA has charged that the suit brought by NYAG Letitia James is politically motivated.
To read more, click here.
Brewer News Release - NRA Prevails Over NYAG: Court Rules Association Cannot be Dissolved
New York, New York – March 2, 2022…The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) scored a major legal victory today, as a New York court struck down attempts by the New York Attorney General to dissolve the 150-year-old organization. Following a two-hour hearing on December 10, 2021, the Hon. Joel M. Cohen of the New York State Supreme Court issued an opinion today that vindicates the NRA’s position: the NYAG’s effort to shut down the Association ran afoul of common sense, New York law, and the First Amendment.
“This is a resounding win for the NRA, its 5 million members, and all who believe in this organization,” says NRA President Charles Cotton. “The message is loud and clear: the NRA is strong and secure in its mission to protect constitutional freedom.”
The NRA will defend against the surviving claims in the lawsuit – but today’s ruling declares that the NYAG cannot shut down the Association or seize its assets.
“We applaud the court’s recognition that dissolution is neither appropriate nor justified,” says William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and counsel to the NRA. “We look forward to continuing the defense of the NRA – and proving that it acts in the best interests of its members and the Second Amendment freedoms in which they believe.”
Emphasizing that the NRA is “a prominent advocacy organization that represents the interests of millions of members,” the court said the NYAG failed to meet the “rigorous” standard for state-sponsored dissolution of such a group – and her attempt raised free speech concerns.
In an opinion, dated March 2, 2022, Justice Cohen writes, “The Attorney General’s claims to dissolve the NRA are dismissed.” It adds, “The Complaint does not allege that any financial misconduct benefited the NRA, or that the NRA exists primarily to carry out such activity, or that the NRA is incapable of continuing its legitimate activities on behalf of its millions of members.”
The NRA has argued that it has demonstrated a commitment to good governance, and long believed that the NYAG’s case was part of a political vendetta. NYAG James famously vowed to “target the NRA” and “investigate the legitimacy of the NRA as a charitable organization” while on the campaign trail in July 2018 – before spending even one day in office and without any evidence of wrongdoing. She filed a lawsuit in August 2020 seeking to shut down the Association.
The NRA has successfully proven there was no legal precedent or factual basis for the NYAG’s scorched-earth, politicized approach.
The court observes, “The Attorney General cites no case in which she or her predecessors have sought – much less obtained – dissolution under analogous circumstances.” The opinion also states, “…dissolving the NRA could impinge, at least indirectly, on the free speech and assembly rights of its millions of members. While that alone would not preclude statutory dissolution if circumstances otherwise clearly warranted it, the Court believes it is a relevant factor that counsels against State-imposed dissolution, which should be the last option, not the first.”
In addition to the dissolution claims, the court also dismissed claims by the NYAG for unjust enrichment and violations of the Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act.
Against the backdrop of the NYAG’s lawsuit, the NRA is pursuing its own legal action against James. In a legal filing, dated February 23, 2021, the NRA responded to the August 2020 lawsuit filed by the NYAG. The filing alleges that her case is part of a crusade to silence a powerful political opponent – and its stated purpose to defend the Second Amendment.
According to the NRA’s filing, “James’s threatened, and actual, regulatory and civil reprisals are a blatant and malicious retaliation campaign against the NRA and its constituents based on her disagreement with the content of their speech. This wrongful conduct threatens to destroy the NRA and chill the speech of the NRA, its members, and other constituents, including like-minded groups and their members.”
Brewer adds, “Today’s developments underscore the simple truth that since taking office in 2019, the Attorney General has pushed a contrived narrative about the NRA in her attempt to support a dissolution claim that is improper. This is a victory for not only the NRA, but all who believe in the right to free speech and association.”
Attorneys for the NRA in this matter are William A. Brewer III, Sarah Rogers and Svetlana Eisenberg.
Brewer Anti-SLAPP Expert Analysis Article Published by Law360
On January 12, 2022, Law360 published an expert analysis piece written by Brewer Partner William Brewer and Associate Will Brewer titled, “Ruling Confirms Causation is Key Under NY Anti-SLAPP Law.”
The article states, “Threats of litigation initiated for the purpose of censoring, intimidating, or punishing a person for exercising their First Amendment rights have prompted many jurisdictions to pass laws targeting strategic litigation against public participation, otherwise known as anti-SLAPP statutes.”
The article discusses how the Hon. Nancy Bannon of the New York Supreme Court recently considered and dismissed an anti-SLAPP counterclaim in a dispute between Howard M. Meyers and and LEG Q LLC (“LEG Q”) in RSR Corp. et al. v. LEG Q LLC et al., Index No. 650342/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.).
The authors write, “If this ruling is any indication of how New York courts will interpret the anti-SLAPP claim in the future, counsel should take note that, at the motion to dismiss stage, an anti-SLAPP claim need not have in hand any judicial finding regarding the nature of a purportedly SLAPP lawsuit; allegations will suffice.”
The authors add, “Moreover, in light of this decision, the breadth of what constitutes a communication in connection with the ‘public interest’—reaching matters that are not purely private as between the parties—cannot be overstated.”
To read more, click here.
New York Law Journal: NRA Files Motion to Dismiss New York AG's Lawsuit for Dissolution
On September 16, 2021, The New York Law Journal and other media outlets reported that firm client the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) has filed a Motion to Dismiss the New York Attorney General's (NYAG) Amended Complaint, filed on August 16, 2021. The Motion to Dismiss claims that the NYAG seeks to dissolve the NRA in an effort to "silence the constitutionally guaranteed political speech of its 5 million members."
“Since taking office in 2019, the Attorney General has ignored evidence that dissolution is improper and that the NRA Board of Directors acted appropriately at all times,” William Brewer, counsel to the NRA, told the Journal. “The NRA will continue to confront this partisan attack—in the interest of its members and the Second Amendment freedom for which they stand.”
The NYAG's office initially filed its dissolution lawsuit in August 2020, claiming that the NRA misused funds for the personal gain of its top executives. In its Motion to Dismiss, the NRA argues that "[e]ven if the allegations against current and former executives are taken as true (as they must be, for purposes of this Motion), the NRA and its Board would be the victims of the alleged wrongdoing—not perpetrators."
The Motion to Dismiss also notes that a "federal bankruptcy court found after a review of voluminous evidence, that the NRA has undertaken a sustained effort to improve its internal compliance procedures and is in position to continue fulfilling its mission."
“The Texas federal court expressly concluded that the NRA is well-placed to continue improving governance and internal controls and to fulfill its mission, as it has since its whistleblowers came forward,” Brewer wrote. “These findings comprehensively undermine the NYAG’s contrived narrative of an organization rife with corruption that is unable to reform itself and that must, therefore, be dissolved.”
Uber Faces Trial in Lawsuit Over Sexual Assault by Driver
August 11, 2021 – The Brewer law firm announced that its high-profile lawsuit against Uber is moving forward.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Lewis J. Liman overruled Uber’s motion to dismiss a 2020 lawsuit that alleges that Uber’s claims relating to rider-safety are materially deceptive. The case now moves forward.
Originally filed on September 28, 2020, the lawsuit was filed by a female passenger who alleges she was sexually assaulted during a 2018 late-night ride home from New York City. Plaintiff, identified as “Jane Doe,” alleges that Uber failed to take reasonable steps to vet the driver, who assaulted her when she drifted off to sleep. In a case that captured national headlines, plaintiff reported that she suffered physical and emotional trauma.
“Our client views this decision as an opportunity to shine a bright light on the company’s failure to protect its female passengers,” says William A. Brewer III, counsel for plaintiff. “There is no doubt that millions of female passengers rely upon Uber’s representations to provide a ‘safe ride.’ Our client experienced something hauntingly different: assault at the hands of a sexual predator.”
Plaintiff asserts that Uber makes material misrepresentations to customers regarding the safety of its services, especially for female riders. In a 42-page opinion, dated July 28, 2021, the judge writes that Uber advertises that it provides the “safest rides on the road.” The judge observes that it is reasonable for a consumer to expect that “safety” includes non-traffic-related driver behavior such as sexual assault.
“If Uber had wanted to limit its claim to the make and model, features, or maintenance of the cars, they could have said ‘connecting you to the safest cars on the road,’” writes Judge Liman. He further writes, “Plaintiff sufficiently alleges that Uber’s statements about the safety of its rides were misrepresentations that concealed safety risks. Asserting that a product in its entirety (or majority) has a quality, when in fact only a portion of that product has that quality, is materially deceptive.”
The court observes that Uber had data on the “safe/unsafe composition of its driver pool” at the time of plaintiff’s assault due to the company’s sexual assault data, yet “There is no indication from the pleadings that Uber has shared that data with customers or created a feature to flag drivers that have been reported.” As alleged in plaintiff’s lawsuit, in December 2019, Uber reported nearly 6,000 reports of sexual assaults during its rides in the United States in 2017 and 2018. Approximately 89 percent of the victims were women or female-identifying individuals.
The judge writes, “…Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged that Uber’s misrepresentations concealed a foreseeable risk covering sexual assault of a rider by a driver, which then materialized. Plaintiff has also sufficiently alleged that her reliance on Uber’s misrepresentations caused the loss she suffered – her assault.” Therefore, he concludes that Plaintiff stated a viable claim for negligent misrepresentation.
The decision concludes, “The Court will permit Plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint to add allegations that support Uber owed a duty to Plaintiff and its passengers as a common carrier. Plaintiff will also be permitted to amend the complaint with additional facts regarding Uber’s knowledge of Hussain’s [the driver] propensity for sexual assault.”
Plaintiff’s deadline to file an amended complaint is August 27, 2021.
El Paso Times Reports on Lawsuit Against Chrysler Brought by Texas Dealership Owner
On August 9, 2021, the El Paso Times published a front-page article reporting that Brewer client Richard C. Poe II has sued Chrysler, as he fights for control of his Texas dealerships.
The article reported that in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Michigan, Poe claims that Chrysler conspired with three of his father’s business associates and their appointed dealership manager to prevent Poe from taking control of the dealerships.
William Brewer, counsel to Poe, told the Times, “Chrysler knew Richard was the heir apparent. When Dick Poe passed away, the one with legitimate control was Richard, but Chrysler began refusing to talk to Richard and awarded the dealership (control) to the interlopers."
The Times reported that the lawsuit lists the dealerships “derivatively” as plaintiffs along with Poe.
“Because he has an ownership interest in the dealerships," Poe has the legal right to file the lawsuit on behalf of the dealerships so they can receive restitution from Chrysler, Brewer said in a statement. “Naturally, those in control are critical of his efforts to bring this action" because the lawsuit includes allegations against them, he added.