Rothwell Figg Team Appears in District Court on Behalf of Pro Bono Client Chabad in Ongoing Battle Against Russian Federation
Rothwell Figg Team Appears in District Court on Behalf of Pro Bono Client Chabad in Ongoing Battle Against Russian FederationDecember 3, 2019
On Tuesday, December 3, 2019, a team of Rothwell Figg attorneys appeared in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of pro bono client Agudas Chasidei Chabad of United States as part of Chabad’s lawsuit against the Russian Federation. The hearing was only the most recent milestone in the long-standing effort to secure the return of the Schneerson archive and library, which was seized by the Nazis and is currently being held illegally by Russia. See Court Issues $43 Million Sanction Order Against Russian Federation in Favor of Rothwell Figg Client (September 10, 2015), Partner Steven Lieberman Quoted in BuzzFeed News Article On Jewish Texts Seized by Russia (October 11, 2017), Rothwell Figg Helps Secure Return of Chabad’s Sacred Text, a Milestone in Decades-Long Litigation between Chabad and the Russian Federation (October 31, 2017), and Rothwell Figg Attorneys Celebrate Return of Sacred Text with Government Officials (November 9, 2017).
Steven Lieberman led the efforts on behalf of Rothwell Figg at a hearing covering several pending motions and involving attorneys on behalf of the United States Government and two third-parties. Specifically, the hearing concerned Chabad’s request for an additional sanctions award of $78,300,000.00 against the Russian Federation, in addition to the $43,700,000.00 in sanctions that have already been secured. Chabad was also opposing efforts by the third-parties to resist discovery into Russian assets. Dan McCallum also argued on behalf of Chabad.
Chabad is represented by Steven Lieberman, Robert Parker, Jennifer Nock, Dan McCallum, and Richard Waterman of Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C., and Nathan Lewin and Alyza Lewin of Lewin & Lewin, LLP. The case is Agudas Chasidei Chabad of United States v. Russian Federation, et al., No. 05-cv-1548.