| BS&K Partner H.J. Hubert and Judge Fern Fisher at July Pro Bono Action Committee Meeting |
"We are honored to have Judge Fisher with us today," stated Bond, Schoeneck & King partner H. J. Hubert. Mr. Hubert is also the Firm's Pro Bono Coordinator. "The Access to Justice Program is very necessary and I am sure it will prove to be a huge success throughout New York State." Following the Committee's meeting, a reception for committee members and invited guests, including area judges and attorneys, was held.
Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC Honored With Distinguished Pro Bono Service Award
Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC was presented with the 2005 Onondaga County Bar Association's Distinguished Pro Bono Service Award for the Firm's generous contribution of legal services. The award was given during the Onondaga County Bar Foundation Annual Law Day luncheon on May 4, 2005.
In February 2002, WSTM broadcast a two-part report on its evening news program entitled "A Cry for Help" which focused on the frustrations experienced by a single mother of two minor children, as she attempted to navigate the Cayuga County judicial and child welfare protection systems for meaningful orders of protection based on her minor daughter's allegations that she was being abused during court-sanctioned visits with her biological father. One year later, the biological father sued the mother and WSTM for libel based upon the two-part broadcast.
At the request of Esther Weingarten, pro bono coordinator for the Legal Aid Society of Mid-New York, Inc., Bond, Schoeneck & King assembled a defense team consisting of Lillian Abbott Pfohl and Meghan Beakman, under the supervision of Ed Conan to defend the mother in the libel action.
Following a successful motion to transfer venue to Supreme Court, Onondaga County, the BS&K attorneys moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint on the grounds that the mother's statements in the broadcast interview were absolutely privileged as fair and true reports of ongoing judicial proceedings and were otherwise comprised of non-actionable opinion or statements that were not provably false given the documentary evidence submitted in the underlying custody and neglect proceedings, and on the ground that the Complaint against the mother was barred by the one year statute of limitations. While a successful motion to dismiss on the pleadings would eliminate the possibility of a monetary judgment against Ms. York, the pre-answer motion strategy was primarily designed to spare the client and her minor children from the rigors of pretrial discovery and depositions where they would have to relive the troubling allegations of abuse that they thought had been put behind them in January 2002, when the biological father agreed to give up custody and physical visitation rights in exchange for a dismissal of the abuse charges pending against him in Cayuga County. On April 5, 2005, the Court granted the mother's motion in its entirety, and dismissed the libel complaint.