Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Ex-Officer Accused of Juror Tampering in Employee's Lawsuit

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
July 30, 2004

A former modeling agency executive has been arrested on charges that she tampered with a jury in an unusual civil suit over cigarette smoke in the workplace. The executive, Mary Ann D'Angelico, voluntarily surrendered to authorities last month. She is accused of speaking to a juror in a courthouse restroom in an attempt to influence the multi-million-dollar lawsuit by a former employee. Ms. D'Angelico faces up to 1 year in prison if convicted of the Class A misdemeanor. Her attorney, Daniel J. Horwitz, a partner at Carter Ledyard & Milburn, said she would fight the charge.

“We feel that the charge is not warranted, and we will vigorously challenge the allegations at trial,” he said.

The Case

Ms. D'Angelico was a named defendant in a lawsuit against the agency, Elite Model Management, by a former sales director who had been fired. She still works at Elite, but she is no longer an officer of the company. Horwitz said her change in status was unrelated to the lawsuit. The former sales director, Victoria Gallegos, alleged that cigarette smoke in the workplace aggravated her asthma, caused chronic sinusitis and made her cough up blood. She had worked at Elite for 6 weeks, she said, when she was fired for complaining about the smoke.

Ms. Gallegos sued, and a jury awarded her $5.2 million, including $2.6 million in punitive damages. She had asked for only $4.6 million, and Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Louis B. York later reduced the award to $4.3 million.

While the jury was deliberating over the damages, Ms. D'Angelico allegedly tried to disparage Ms. Gallegos during a conversation with a juror in the women's room. The juror, Barbara Yanoscik, told another juror, John D. Albright, who is an attorney, about the conversation. Albright informed Justice York. The judge dismissed both jurors and seated two alternates who voted with the remaining four jurors for the $5.2 million verdict (NYLJ Jan. 7, 2004).

In an interview last year, Albright said he and Ms. Yanoscik were the least sympathetic to Ms. Gallegos' claims, though like the rest of the jury they agreed that Elite was liable for compensatory damages. Albright said that when he and Ms. Yanoscik were dismissed, the other jurors were upset. The event, he said, could have changed the dynamic of the trial and made it more favorable to the plaintiff.

Elite is seeking an appeal of the verdict.

A former modeling agency executive has been arrested on charges that she tampered with a jury in an unusual civil suit over cigarette smoke in the workplace. The executive, Mary Ann D'Angelico, voluntarily surrendered to authorities last month. She is accused of speaking to a juror in a courthouse restroom in an attempt to influence the multi-million-dollar lawsuit by a former employee. Ms. D'Angelico faces up to 1 year in prison if convicted of the Class A misdemeanor. Her attorney, Daniel J. Horwitz, a partner at Carter Ledyard & Milburn, said she would fight the charge.

“We feel that the charge is not warranted, and we will vigorously challenge the allegations at trial,” he said.

The Case

Ms. D'Angelico was a named defendant in a lawsuit against the agency, Elite Model Management, by a former sales director who had been fired. She still works at Elite, but she is no longer an officer of the company. Horwitz said her change in status was unrelated to the lawsuit. The former sales director, Victoria Gallegos, alleged that cigarette smoke in the workplace aggravated her asthma, caused chronic sinusitis and made her cough up blood. She had worked at Elite for 6 weeks, she said, when she was fired for complaining about the smoke.

Ms. Gallegos sued, and a jury awarded her $5.2 million, including $2.6 million in punitive damages. She had asked for only $4.6 million, and Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Louis B. York later reduced the award to $4.3 million.

While the jury was deliberating over the damages, Ms. D'Angelico allegedly tried to disparage Ms. Gallegos during a conversation with a juror in the women's room. The juror, Barbara Yanoscik, told another juror, John D. Albright, who is an attorney, about the conversation. Albright informed Justice York. The judge dismissed both jurors and seated two alternates who voted with the remaining four jurors for the $5.2 million verdict (NYLJ Jan. 7, 2004).

In an interview last year, Albright said he and Ms. Yanoscik were the least sympathetic to Ms. Gallegos' claims, though like the rest of the jury they agreed that Elite was liable for compensatory damages. Albright said that when he and Ms. Yanoscik were dismissed, the other jurors were upset. The event, he said, could have changed the dynamic of the trial and made it more favorable to the plaintiff.

Elite is seeking an appeal of the verdict.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit Image

Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.