You are here

Available Cases

Plaintiff Michael Walsh claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) that the Plan, a multiemployer pension plan, improperly denied his application for a pension for failure to have ten years of vesting required for a pension. Defendant recently filed a motion to dismiss asserting that Walsh’s challenge to the Trustees’ 2017 decision is untimely. If interested, please email

Plaintiff, while a pretrial detainee, filed a civil rights action for excessive use of force against officers within a jail. Trial is scheduled to begin during the two-week period commencing July 17, 2023. If interested, please email

Plaintiff, Alexander Yanes (“Plaintiff”), was a watch technician employed by defendant The Swatch Group (U.S.) Inc. (“Defendant”). Plaintiff alleges that because of his race and/or national origin he was subjected to a hostile work environment, required to work in high temperature conditions, and refused accommodations after sustaining injuries related to a car accident. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit after receiving a Right to Sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. If interested, please email

Plaintiff filed an action against Defendant, the City of Broward County Public Schools, in state court for breach of contract, discrimination, and false claims act, and retaliation-based claims. Defendant recently removed Plaintiff’s action to this Court and Plaintiff is seeking assistance from the Volunteer Attorney Program. If interested, please email

Mr. Ryzhov alleges that, while working as a lawyer in Russia, he represented certain entities, the Sokolov family and the Automobilist, who were trying to prevent an illegal corporate takeover of the Automobilist by our Defendants, OAO Sanatorium Automobilist and Valeriy Nikolaevich Durandin. As a result of his efforts, Mr. Ryzhov says, the Defendants were prosecuted in Russia. According to Mr. Ryzhov, the Defendants—angered by that prosecution—conspired to dispossess him of certain property interests he held here and in Russia. Mr. Ryzhov has asserted seventeen counts against the Defendants—all under various state and federal laws. Mr. Ryzhov has asked for money damages to compensate him for the property interests he lost, and he wants the Court to enjoin the Defendants from any further conversion of those interests. The Defendants have not yet been served. If interested, please email

Plaintiff Maximino Cuevas, Jr. brings claims against Abbey Delray South for disability discrimination and retaliatory termination, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101. Plaintiff alleges that Abbey Delray South unlawfully retaliated against him due to his physical handicap by being removed and transferred from his position as a technician. If interested, please email

Matthew McIntosh Doreste, pro se, filed a civil rights action for excessive force against officers within the jail. Calendar call is set for March 24, 2023, and trial is set to begin March 27, 2023. If interested, please email

The Plaintiff, Daniel Dumond, has filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against an officer employed by the Miami-Dade Police Department for his deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s safety and medical needs. Plaintiff alleges that the officer intentionally and maliciously drove his squad car in a reckless manner, knowing that Plaintiff was unrestrained and injured in the back seat, with the intention of harming Plaintiff. The Plaintiff may also bring claims in the future against other law enforcement officers for their alleged use of excessive force during Plaintiff’s arrest, but the identity of these officers is still unknown. If interested, please email

Pro se plaintiff Dionte Jermaine Davis is a state prisoner with the Florida Department of Corrections. He filed this § 1983 action, alleging that Dade County corrections officers sexually assaulted him and used excessive force by spraying him with chemical agents. The Court allowed Plaintiff to proceed with his claims and the case is currently in discovery. Trial is set for July 10, 2023.

There is a pending discovery dispute in this matter. The Court denied Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 56] as premature and granted more time for discovery because Plaintiff identified a video of the use of force incident that Defendants failed to produce. [ECF No. 70]. Chief United States Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres held an evidentiary hearing on the matter and ordered Defendants to produce the video or provide an explanation of why they are unable to do so. Defendants will refile their Motion for Summary Judgment after the resolution of this discovery dispute. If interested, please email

Plaintiff Gustavo Abella, brought this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U .S.C. § 1983 asserting that Defendant Officer Juan Rodriguez retaliated against him for exercising his right to free speech-a violation of the First Amendment. Following a three-day trial , the jury found that although Defendant intimidated, threatened, and / or harassed Plaintiff, Plaintiff failed to prove that his display ofa political sign on his vehicle or his filing of complaints against Defendant were motivating factors . (See ECF No. 277-1 ). Following the jury 's verdict the Court entered a Final Judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff. (ECF No. 288). The Court also denied Plaintiff’s Motion for a New Trial. (ECF No. 300). Thereafter, Plaintiff appealed the Court’s order denying a new trial to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. (ECF No. 308). Plaintiff’s prior pro bono attorneys moved for and were granted withdrawal by the Court of Appeals. Plaintiff seeks representation for his pending appeal before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. If interested, please email the chambers of the Honorable Donald L. Graham