Partners Effie Blassberger and James Valentino, and associate Thomas Dollar published a New York Law Journal article analyzing the evolving litigation landscape under New York City’s Gender Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), with a focus on the statute’s 2026 amendments and their implications for corporate liability, preemption, and forum selection.

The article titled “The Next Wave of GMVA Litigation: Corporate Liability, Preemption, and Strategic Forum Selection” explains how the latest amendments that went into effect in January 2026 expand the reach of the GMVA by expressly applying prior liability expansions retroactively. This change allows claims to proceed against entities and individuals for allegedly enabling gender-motivated violence dating back decades, while also opening a new revival window through July 2027 for claims that were previously time-barred.

Blassberger, Valentino, and Dollar explore how courts have begun interpreting the GMVA’s broadened liability provisions, particularly as they apply to corporate defendants. They highlight early federal and state court decisions that reveal a split in how rigorously courts are evaluating allegations that an entity “enabled” or participated in gender-motivated violence.

The authors also examine the growing significance of preemption, noting that the New York Court of Appeals is expected to decide whether earlier GMVA revival periods conflicted with statewide statutes such as the Adult Survivors Act (ASA) and the Child Victims Act (CVA). That decision could have sweeping consequences for the viability of claims brought under the newest amendments.

In addition, the article addresses the strategic importance of forum selection, observing that federal courts have generally taken a more exacting approach to pleadings, while state courts have been more likely to allow claims to proceed into discovery. This divergence, the authors note, is likely to shape litigation strategy for both plaintiffs and defendants.

“The next phase of GMVA litigation will test both the statutory framework and the willingness of courts to extend liability beyond the individual perpetrator,” the authors write, emphasizing the broader legal and reputational risks facing corporate defendants.

Read the full article here.