Supreme Court Lifts All Restraining Orders, Finds No Conflict of Interest, and Sets January 14, 2026 Hearing to Address “Troubling” Discrepancies in Plaintiff’s Evidence

NEW YORK — Today, in a decisive ruling, the New York State Supreme Court has denied the motion by Plaintiff Vladimir Ravich and his counsel, John Scola, to disqualify Eric Sanders, Esq. from representing Deputy Chief Winston M. Faison, lifted all temporary restraining orders, and ordered a special evidentiary hearing to address remarkable and troubling discrepancies in evidence submitted to the Court.

In its Decision and Order in Ravich v. City of New York, et al. (Index No. 161574/2025), Justice Carol Sharpe held that the Plaintiff failed to meet the heavy burden required to disqualify counsel, finding no conflict of interest and no basis to deprive Deputy Chief Faison of counsel of choice.

The Court further vacated all temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, restoring full freedom of representation.

While denying disqualification, Justice Sharpe focused significant attention on inconsistencies in email evidence submitted by Plaintiff and his counsel. The Court found that emails filed as exhibits, emails submitted in PDF format, and emails forwarded to Chambers differed in material ways, including discrepancies involving attachments labeled “Background.docx” and “Complaint.docx,” which appeared in some versions but not others, or appeared under different filenames.

In her written decision, Justice Sharpe stated:

“The discrepancies in the email submissions raises the question of whether technology and printing issues caused them, or if there is possible misconduct by plaintiff and/or counsel… A court has inherent power to address actions which are meant to undermine the truth-seeking function of the judicial system.”

As a result, the Court ordered a January 14, 2026 evidentiary hearing to address the integrity of the submissions and determine the cause of the discrepancies.

The Court also ruled that any claim of attorney-client privilege was waived by the Plaintiff’s own filings, placing the disputed communications “at issue” and subject to disclosure.

“This decision reaffirms that ethics rules cannot be weaponized to sideline opposing counsel,” said Eric Sanders. “The Court rejected an attempt to manufacture a conflict where none existed and appropriately directed further inquiry into discrepancies that go to the integrity of the judicial process.”

Key Rulings

• Motion to Disqualify DENIED — Plaintiff failed to establish any disqualifying conflict.

• All Restraining Orders LIFTED — No restrictions remain on counsel’s representation.

• Privilege Waived — Disputed emails deemed at issue and subject to disclosure.

• Evidentiary Hearing ORDERED — January 14, 2026 hearing to address discrepancies in Plaintiff’s submissions.

About The Sanders Firm, P.C.

Founded by civil-rights attorney Eric Sanders, The Sanders Firm, P.C. is a New York–based law firm concentrating on civil-rights, employment, and police-accountability litigation. The firm is known for handling complex cases involving racial discrimination, due-process violations, and institutional abuse of power, particularly where government actions undermine constitutional and civil-service protections.

###

Read the Affirmation of Eric Sanders, Esq.

Read the Affidavit of Deputy Chief Winston M. Faison

Read the Decision and Order