Alexandra Marchuk v. Faruqi & Faruqi: Bad News For The Defendants

Marchuk v. Faruqi & Faruqi, the high-profile sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Alexandra Marchuk against her former firm and one of its most prominent partners, Juan Monteverde, rolls on. Back in January, we covered some of the salacious revelations contained in the summary judgment papers.

You know what would be even more juicy? A trial.

And that’s what we might be getting, in the wake of two blows just dealt to the defendants in this matter….

Legal Is Changing. And NeoSummit Is Where The Future Is Being Built.

Legal and operational leaders are gathering May 6–7 in Fort Lauderdale to confront the questions the industry hasn't answered—with a keynote from Amanda Knox setting the tone.

By Neostella

Yesterday Judge Alvin Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.) issued two rulings in the Marchuk matter. First, the judge denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Marchuk’s defamation claims. Marchuk alleges that the defendants defamed her when they sent out a press release claiming that her original lawsuit “was maliciously brought to extort money from F&F” and to tarnish “the reputation of Juan Monteverde, with whom she was obsessed.”

Second, the judge denied the defendants’ motion to exclude Marchuk’s expert witness on damages, Michael Lord. Judge Hellerstein ruled that Lord “is sufficiently qualified to testify on the issues of lost earnings and employability of lawyers seeking employment,” but must provide the defendants with “information relevant for cross-examination,” including “specific and illustrative earnings information.”

“We are very pleased with the Court’s rulings, and with our case in general,” said Harry Lipman, Marchuk’s lead lawyer. “Our sights are now on trial.”