EDNY Judge Allows Malicious Prosecution Suit Against Former AG Schneiderman to Proceed
Brooklyn, NY — In a ruling issued in the Eastern District of New York, Judge Brian M. Cogan declined to dismiss key claims brought by former New York City Council member Ruben Wills against ex-New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman, allowing Wills’ malicious prosecution and abuse of process claim to proceed past the pleading stage.
Background
Ruben Wills, once a rising political figure in Queens, was indicted and later convicted in 2017 on multiple state charges, including grand larceny and offering a false instrument for filing. The charges stemmed from alleged misuse of public funds—first, campaign finance matching funds, and second, a state grant awarded to a nonprofit he founded, NY4Life.
Wills served approximately two years in prison before the New York Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed his conviction in People v. Wills, 186 A.D.3d 1416 (2d Dep’t 2020), citing the trial court’s improper refusal to allow exculpatory witness testimony. The case was not retried, and the charges were ultimately dismissed by Schneiderman’s successor, Attorney General Letitia James.
Allegations Against Schneiderman
Wills alleges that Schneiderman pursued him in bad faith, motivated not by legitimate law enforcement concerns, but by political vendettas and personal animus. The complaint outlines a detailed theory:
- Schneiderman allegedly sought Wills’ cooperation to build a case against a political rival.
- When Wills refused, Schneiderman allegedly retaliated by initiating a selective and politically motivated prosecution.
- Wills also claims Schneiderman was aware that Wills knew of his alleged history of violence against women, which had not yet become public.
- He accuses Schneiderman of presenting only inculpatory evidence to a grand jury, withholding exculpatory material (including a key tape), and abusing subpoena powers, such as accessing privileged emails and sealed Family Court records without proper justification.
Wills further points to a campaign advertisement run by Schneiderman featuring footage of Wills being arrested in handcuffs, which he argues reflected a vindictive intent to publicly vilify him for political gain.
Claims and Procedural Posture
Wills brings two primary claims against Schneiderman in his individual capacity:
- Malicious prosecution and abuse of process, arising from the alleged wrongful initiation and conduct of the criminal case.
- Failure to intervene, though Wills has since withdrawn this claim, narrowing the case.
Schneiderman moved to dismiss the complaint in full.
Court’s Decision
While the full memorandum decision is pending publication, the court has allowed the malicious prosecution and abuse of process claim to go forward. This means Wills will now be permitted to engage in discovery against Schneiderman—a significant step in a case accusing a former top law enforcement official of political retaliation and misconduct.
Context and Implications
This case comes years after Schneiderman resigned in disgrace following separate allegations of assault and abuse by multiple women. Wills’ complaint underscores the ways in which alleged personal misconduct and political ambition can intersect with prosecutorial power.
The ruling could also set precedent for other individuals who claim politically motivated targeting by prosecutors, particularly in cases where convictions have been overturned and retrials declined.