People who were wrongfully detained too long by immigration authorities have three additional months to file claims under a $92.5 million settlement, one of the largest immigration-related civil rights deals in New York City history, according to an announcement Thursday by the law firm that won the deal. 

The law firm, Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP, said the extension gives over 20,000 people from 10 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean until Aug. 15 to seek compensation for being held beyond their release dates on the basis of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency detainer between April 1, 1997, and Dec. 21, 2012, when the agency updated its policy on their use. Class members could see payouts of $10,000 or more under the settlement, according to the firm. 

Emery Celli is seeking additional class members to come forward and claim funds under the deal, whether they currently live in the U.S. or not, and is hoping that community organizations, advocates, media outlets and attorneys who may have previously represented class members will spread the word.

"We're talking about a settlement that could give people $10,000 or more," partner Debbie Greenberger told Law360, "it's so rare that you get to reach out to former clients to give them good news."

The announcement comes more than 15 years after lead plaintiff Oscar Onadia, an immigrant from Burkina Faso who died in 2024 when he was in his early 50s, first took NYC to court. According to the lawsuit, Onadia was living in the U.S. on an overstayed student visa when he was arrested for driving without a license in 2008.

Onadia served a five-day sentence for the offense, but ended up spending 41 more days in jail, despite the 48-hour limit that was supposed to exist for ICE detainees. The delay occurred after New York City's Department of Correction refused to release Onadia on bail because it had received a form from ICE indicating that the federal agency was investigating whether he should be deported.

"It seems that New York City corrections would just wait until ICE came to pick somebody up for certain people, and that could be a very, very long period of time," Greenberger said.

Judge Mitchell J. Danziger of New York Supreme Court in the Bronx granted class certification in January 2017.

"Our legal theory evolved over the course of the case," Greenberger noted. "Our position now is that, under the federal Constitution, New York City did not have probable cause or the authority to hold people based on an ICE detainer, not for one hour, not for 48 hours, and certainly not for beyond 48 hours."

On the day the window closed in December 2012, ICE updated its detainer policy in a memo, saying officials should only issue a detainer against an individual when there is reason to believe that the defendant is an undocumented person subject to removal from the United States and one of several potential conditions have been met — for instance, the defendant has a felony charge or conviction or an outstanding order of removal.

New York City also began narrowing when it would hold someone based on an ICE detainer with a series of laws starting in 2011. Then, in November 2018, a state appeals court ruled that state and local police cannot detain individuals suspected of lacking legal immigration status at ICE's request.

"During the period this case covers, from 1997 to 2012, New York City — and localities across the country — operated with the assumption that compliance with ICE detainers was mandated under federal law," a spokesman for the New York City Law Department told Law360 in December, when the New York state court gave the settlement its initial approval. "Court rulings eventually clarified that localities could not hold a detainee beyond their release date based solely on the contents of a federal detainer and that a court order is needed."

Class members can find the form to file claims on New York City's website. The date and length of their overdetention will determine how much they receive.

The initial May 15 deadline would have only applied if 75% of the class responded by that deadline, which Greenberger said wasn't expected to happen. Now, the firm is hoping that more class members will learn of the deal the firm secured.

"If people could reach out to their former clients and say, 'You might be eligible for this really substantial settlement,' or, 'Your loved one might be eligible,' especially at a time where there's so much anti-immigrant sentiment, to be able to give somebody good news is something that's a rare opportunity for lawyers," Greenberger said.

--Additional reporting by Rae Ann Varona. Editing by Karin Roberts.