Court Digest

New York
DOJ says First National Bank discriminated against Black, Latino borrowers in North Carolina

NEW YORK (AP) — First National Bank of Pennsylvania discriminated against Black and Latino homebuyers in North Carolina for a period of at least four years, the Justice Department said Monday, the latest in a long list of banks who have been caught redlining.

The Justice Department said FNB will pay $13.5 million to settle the redlining charges, of which the bulk will go into a fund to help subsidize loans for Black and Latino borrowers in Charlotte and Winston-Salem, two housing markets where the DOJ found discrimination.

In its complaint, the DOJ alleges that First National closed branches in majority-minority neighborhoods, failed to provide mortgage services to Black and Latino potential borrowers, and ignored entire neighborhoods for potential lending. The DOJ found that lenders of similar size and scope to First National did two to four times as much lending to minority borrowers between 2017 and 2021 as First National.

The case comes from when FNB bought Yadkin Bank, a regional bank in the Carolinas, in 2017. While FNB says the bad behavior happened at Yadkin before the acquisition, the DOJ said that any bank that buys another bank should be held accountable for the acquired bank’s actions.

“The playing field isn’t level, and that is not what we want for the people of North Carolina,” said Josh Stein, North Carolina’s Attorney General.

This is the 13th redlining settlement that the Biden Administration has brought against banks since 2021. Under Attorney General Merrick Garland, the Justice Department has created a Redlining Taskforce to focus on racial discrimination in financial services in a way that few administrations have done so in the past.

The DOJ brought the largest redlining lawsuit in history in 2023 against Los Angeles-based City National Bank, which was also found to have discriminated against Black and Latino communities over a similar time period, from 2017 to 2020.


Florida
Disney wants trade secrets kept confidential in lawsuit with DeSantis appointees

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Disney wants to keep confidential any proprietary information or trade secrets that comes out of its state court fight with Gov. Ron DeSantis’ appointees over who controls the governing district at Walt Disney World.

The entertainment giant asked a state court judge on Friday for a protective order allowing it to designate documents and depositions as confidential and requiring parties handling them to sign a nondisclosure agreement.

The litigation is likely going to involve the disclosure of trade secrets, as well as technical, financial and personal information, which could result in “significant harm” if they are made public, Disney said in its request. The request was unopposed by the DeSantis appointees.
Disney supporters had run the district, which provides municipal services such as firefighting, planning and mosquito control, for more than five decades after the Legislature created it in 1967. But legislation passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by DeSantis transferred control of the district’s board from Disney supporters to DeSantis appointees last year.

Disney said it was in retaliation for the company publicly opposing the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. The 2022 law banned classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades and was championed by DeSantis, who had used Disney as a punching bag in speeches on the campaign trail until he recently suspended his campaign for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.

Before control of the district changed hands from Disney allies to DeSantis appointees early last year, the Disney supporters on its board signed agreements with Disney shifting control over design and construction at Disney World to the company. The new DeSantis appointees claimed the “eleventh-hour deals” neutered their powers, and the district sued the company in state court in Orlando to have the contracts voided.

Disney has filed counterclaims that include asking the state court to declare the agreements valid and enforceable.

Separately, Disney had a filed a federal lawsuit against DeSantis and his appointees, claiming the company’s free speech rights were violated. A federal judge in Tallahassee last week dismissed the lawsuit, saying Disney lacked standing in its claims against DeSantis and its claim against the DeSantis appointees lacked merit.

Disney is appealing the ruling.

Tennessee
Lawsuit says hospital shouldn’t have discharged woman who died

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A federal lawsuit says a woman who died last February shouldn’t have been discharged from a Tennessee hospital, forced to leave despite her pleas for more help and unassisted by security guards and police during a medical emergency.

The son of 60-year-old Lisa Edwards on Thursday sued the city of Knoxville, a security company, individual officers and security guards, Fort Sanders Regional Medical Center, its parent company and a physician group.

The death sparked public outrage after the Knoxville Police Department released video early last year showing officers accusing Edwards of faking mobility and breathing problems and ignoring her repeated pleas for help.

Edwards used a wheelchair because of a disability from a previous stroke, the lawsuit says.

Security officers at the hospital called police Feb. 5, 2023, saying that Edwards had been evaluated and discharged, but she was refusing to leave. Several police officers were investigated. The lawsuit filed in Knoxville names three officers who were later disciplined by the city’s police department, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel.

Police Chief Paul Noel has previously said he was “embarrassed and disturbed” by what he saw in the video of the interaction, and added that Edwards “deserved better from us.”

The Knox County District Attorney’s office declined to press criminal charges against the officers after an autopsy determined that Edwards died of a stroke and that “at no time did law enforcement interaction cause or contribute to Ms. Edwards’ death.”

Additionally, the hospital said it conducted a thorough internal investigation of Edwards’ care and found that her “medical treatment and hospital discharge were clinically appropriate.”

The hospital said changes were being made to security procedures. Several security officers who were working at the facility when Edwards was removed are no longer working there, and the hospital and its parent company, Covenant Health, announced plans to add empathy training for security guards.

Edwards was “rolled by hospital security guards into the freezing cold wearing only paper scrubs, placed under physical arrest, and forcibly removed by police officers from the hospital property,” according to the lawsuit, which says it was 29 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 1.7 Celsius) at the time.

A video released by police showed officers struggle for about 25 minutes to move Edwards into a police van and finally a cruiser. Edwards repeatedly asks for help. But she is rebuffed by officers and hospital security guards who become frustrated with her inability to step up into the van and tell her she is faking her incapacity.

After she is placed in a police cruiser, video shows Edwards trying to pull herself upright repeatedly, but eventually she slumps over out of sight. Several minutes later, one of the officers performs a traffic stop on another vehicle while Edwards remains in the backseat.

When he opens the rear door, Edwards is unresponsive. He calls dispatch for an ambulance, telling them, “I don’t know if she’s faking it or what, but she’s not answering me.”

Edwards was pronounced dead at the Fort Sanders Regional Medical Center the following day.

“This was an emergency medical condition that began and worsened on hospital property and that was unequivocally preventable and treatable,” the lawsuit states.

The 18-count lawsuit claims violations of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth and 14th amendments, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act. It alleges a conspiracy to violate federal civil rights and violations of state laws, including a wrongful death claim.

A Covenant Health spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit. A city of Knoxville spokesperson declined to comment as well.

New York
Judge rejects  claim that marijuana licensing cheats out-of-state applicants

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A federal judge has rejected a challenge to New York state’s licensing program for selling legal marijuana, a system two California applicants say unconstitutionally discriminates against out-of-state residents.

The ruling Friday by Albany Judge Anne M. Nardacci may spur New York into issuing hundreds of licenses in a state where most marijuana is sold by unlicensed businesses.

Nardacci said the public interest in letting properly licensed businesses take over the market in New York outweighed concerns raised in the lawsuit.

She said the main purpose of the dormant Commerce Clause plaintiffs argued should allow them to access New York’s market doesn’t apply to the federally illegal cannabis trade. The clause is supposed to stop states from creating protectionist measures to restrict interstate commerce in the absence of rules from Congress.

Two companies controlled by Los Angeles residents had sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in their mid-December lawsuit. They aimed to stall the state’s licensing process while the lawsuit proceeded.

Nardacci rejected the requests in a written ruling, saying an injunction would allow the illicit store operators who now control the market to continue dominating it as the rollout of regulated licenses to sell cannabis products would be delayed.

A lawyer for the plaintiff’s did not immediately respond to requests Sunday for comment. New York state Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement that she was “pleased” with the court decision.

“This is an important victory in our efforts to ensure that disproportionately impacted communities are given their fair share in the legal cannabis industry,” James said.

The state launched its program in October, saying it intended to grant many of the first licenses to individuals with past drug convictions. The system was meant to offer people harmed by the war on drugs a chance to succeed in the market before competitors rushed in.

Lawyers for the state had argued that over 1,000 retail storefronts were expected to be licensed this year and they maintained that the state’s application process allows out-of-state residents to prove that they reside in an area disproportionately impacted by cannabis prohibition.

The moves were expected to boost the number of legal dispensaries in a market now dominated by black-market sellers who simply opened retail stores without a license.

Critics blame New York’s slow retail growth partly on bureaucratic issues, like delays in setting up a $200 million “social equity” fund to help applicants open shops. The rollout also was hobbled by lawsuits on behalf of people and businesses excluded from the first wave of retail licenses.