For Attorney Jim Walden, 'Good Government Litigation' Defies Easy Political Categorization
For attorneys interested in getting involved in the same kind of litigation, Walden had some advice: make a lot of noise, but don't cut corners.
January 16, 2020 at 11:29 AM
7 minute read
When attorney Jim Walden sued the government more than a decade ago to restore food stamps and other public benefits that he claimed were unlawfully revoked from thousands of New Yorkers, he didn't expect the avalanche of opportunities that would follow.
Walden has since taken on several high-profile cases in an area of law that's been coined as "good government litigation," or legal action against the government on behalf of individuals.
In the food stamps case, Walden was suing the state and city governments in New York City on behalf of a class of 11,000 New Yorkers whose benefits had been wrongfully terminated because of a computer failure. He ended up with a massive settlement for those individuals.
"We prepared that case until the eve of trial and then the agencies involved finally agreed to settle," Walden said. "They refunded millions of dollars in food stamps to all the New Yorkers who were impacted.
"That really had an impact on me because I know how much those people desperately needed them," Walden continued.
Walden brought the lawsuit when he was a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, where he worked for nearly a decade until 2015. He was previously a partner at O'Melveny & Myers and also worked as a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn.
Four years ago, he left a secure spot at Gibson Dunn to launch his own firm: Walden Macht & Haran. The firm is based in Manhattan.
Since then, he's led a handful of other lawsuits against the government on a variety of issues, from the condition of public housing to the constitutionality of a state law intended to place additional oversight on prosecutors accused of misconduct.
Each of those opportunities, Walden said, came after he settled the case on food stamps with New York City and the state government. It's not so much that he's sought out those opportunities, he said, it's that they've found him.
"I don't really find them — they seem to find me," Walden said. "Almost every one of these cases, someone has seen something I did previously and reaches out to me because of the work I've done."
Walden was the attorney behind a major lawsuit brought two years ago against the New York City Housing Authority on behalf of a group of public housing residents who alleged the agency had failed to maintain humane conditions for individuals living at its properties.
The lawsuit claimed that NYCHA had failed to prevent lead contamination, and allowed some residents to go without heat or hot water during periods in the winter. The lawsuit gained statewide attention, both from the media and public officials.
Even Gov. Andrew Cuomo offered his support for the litigation, standing with Walden at a press conference to announce that additional state funding would be offered to NYCHA to address the concerns of residents. The remediation effort is still ongoing.
Walden said he was happy with the outcome of the litigation, but that more should be done to improve public housing for residents in New York City. He also didn't close the door on future litigation on the issue.
"Based on the work we did, I was extremely happy with the result," Walden said. "But the NYCHA problem will not be fixed unless new construction is undertaken and people are moved out of the old buildings and into new buildings."
In Albany, Walden's leading a case with statewide implications for prosecutors that's been ongoing now for more than a year.
He's suing New York state, and members of the state Legislature, over a new law that would create a special panel of individuals to review complaints of misconduct brought against the state's district attorneys and their assistants. That lawsuit is ongoing.
It was brought by Walden on behalf of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York, a statewide trade group for the state's prosecutors. The prosecutors have been able to pause the law from going into effect since they first brought the suit in 2018.
They're now waiting for a state judge in Albany to decide whether the law should be struck down as unconstitutional, based on Walden's arguments, or upheld.
But his work as an attorney isn't always targeted against the government. Walden is currently representing the state Department of Financial Services in an action involving the liquidation of an insurance company.
Walden said he was sought out by DFS because of his previous work involving government agencies. He's since led an investigation into the insurance company's failure and is representing DFS as a liquidator in the matter going forward.
That's the thing about this kind of work, Walden said. Even if attorneys regularly brings litigation against the government, they can still expect to earn the respect of public officials and other attorneys if they achieve results. That's what happened with him, Walden said.
"I don't really care who's on the other side," Walden said. "What I care about is the problem and while I'm sure that I have ruffled some feathers, I think there's also a healthy degree of respect that I'm acting for principle not politics."
For attorneys interested in getting involved in the same kind of litigation, Walden had some advice: make a lot of noise, but don't cut corners.
For the best chance at success in litigation against the government, Walden said attorneys should be prepared to hit the books and draft an airtight, thorough complaint. From there, the best move is to seek as much information as possible early on, he said.
"You need to press for discovery early in the case, because the internal communications of these city and state agencies are always going to be fruitful, particularly when you know the problem exists and you can prove it," Walden said.
From there, it's best to make sure a case stays in the public eye, Walden said. That way, the government may feel some pressure to resolve a matter, rather than deciding to prolong the litigation, Walden said.
"You can create circumstances where the city or state decides settling and resolving the problem is a better option than going all the way through with the litigation," he said.
While that strategy can sometimes create friction between his team and the government entity he's suing, Walden said he's also built a reputation that's been to his benefit, rather than a hindrance.
"When they see me coming, I have a tendency to motivate people through relationships and through a tough litigation approach to try to resolve a case," Walden said.
READ MORE:
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 AllNYC's Administrative Court's to Publish Some Rulings in the New York Law Journal Is Welcomed. But It Should Go Further
4 minute readSidley Austin Scores Landmark Civil Rights Verdict Against Prolonged Solitary Confinement in State Prisons
Cuomo Spokesman Sues Wigdor, Alleging Their Lawsuit on Behalf of Trooper Was 'Legally Baseless'
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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