By Melissa A. Murphy
Annapoorni R. Sankaran dreams of seeing South Asian judges on both the federal and state bench — in part, because that's part of her "job."
Recently appointed vice chair of the North American South Asian Bar Association's Judiciary Committee, Sankaran is helping spearhead NASABA's efforts in reviewing judicial candidates nationwide who are seeking endorsement from the organization.
Born in India, Sankaran says she is interested in donning the robe herself someday, but for now she has plenty to keep her busy, both in and out of the courtroom.
As president of the South Asian Bar Association of Greater Boston, she says part of her goal is to encourage more South Asian lawyers to enter government service. But she admits that not having a large community of South Asian lawyers can be a challenge.
"In Massachusetts, I've found that it is such a small legal community here and finding a job in the first place is knowing people and being in the right place at the right time," Sankaran explains.
She adds that it is important to have attorneys who are sensitive to the issues that South Asians face.
Leading by example, Sankaran helped organize a partnership between her local bar association and other South Asian organizations to provide legal assistance to women who are victims of domestic violence facing immigration issues.
But the Greenberg Traurig associate is also making a name for herself in the courtroom as well.
Sankaran started the summer by being involved in two separate cases at the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the same week.
In her first "substantial" victory at the 1st Circuit in Okmyansky v. Herbalife International of America, Inc., she was successful in getting the court to uphold a summary judgment ruling in favor of her defendant client, a multi-level marketing company that was sued by one of its members claiming a loss of commissions.
She says the win should protect her client from similar suits filed by other members since the contract language that was upheld by the 1st Circuit is the same language used in 58 different countries in which her client operates
But while the Okmyansky case was an important win for her client, she readily admits that the other 1st Circuit case she was a part of — In re: Merrimac Paper Co. — may have more widespread importance for practitioners of ERISA and bankruptcy, her own specialties.
Although the decision had not been rendered as of press time, Sankaran, who filed an amicus brief and was instrumental in bringing the Department of Labor into the case, says the 1st Circuit could determine for the first time whether, in a bankruptcy case, "no-fault" equitable subordination is viable under Sect. 510(c) of the Bankruptcy Code.
Sankaran says the outcome will have a direct effect on a pending case of her own involving a class of clients who may lose out on stock option benefits because of a company's bankruptcy.
The 1st Circuit's decision in Merrimac Paper, she says, will determine how ERISA claims are to be treated under the subordination provision of the Bankruptcy Code.
* * *
AGE: 33
GRADUATED: Boston University School of Law, 1995
POSITION: Associate, Greenberg Traurig, Boston
August 29, 2005
