‘Fighting chance’ for parents in Ellen Greenberg civil suit, judge says

On Wednesday, a Common Pleas judge dismissed one defendant in a civil lawsuit against city officials who were involved in the Ellen Greenberg case, while withholding judgment on the other four defendants who asked to have the suit against them dismissed.

In 2022, the parents of Ellen Greenberg filed the suit, alleging the investigation into their daughter’s 2011 death by 20 stab wounds — which was ruled a homicide then switched to suicide — was “deeply botched” and subsequently resulted in a “cover-up” by Philadelphia authorities.

On Wednesday, defense attorneys argued for the case to be dismissed during a summary judgment hearing before Common Pleas Judge Michael Erdos. The suit seeks monetary damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The Philadelphia Law Department, which represents three of the defendants, and outside attorneys for two other defendants in the case contend that Joshua and Sandra Greenberg’s lawsuit lacks merit, the statute of limitations ran out for them to bring their case, and that the defendants, all of whom were or are city employees, have immunity.

Erdos granted summary judgment for one of the defendants, Lindsay Emery, a former pathologist with the Philadelphia Medical Examiner’s Office who was asked in 2019 to examine a section of Greenberg’s spinal column still in storage.

But he withheld his decision on the other four defendants, including the three represented by the city’s Law Department — former Chief Medical Examiner Sam Gulino; retired Homicide Sgt. Tim Cooney; and Homicide Det. John McNamee — and Marlon Osbourne, a former city pathologist who conducted Greenberg’s autopsy and is represented by outside counsel.

In doing so, Erdos requested the Greenbergs’ attorney, Joseph Podraza Jr., file briefs outlining how he intends to show a jury that the remaining defendants directly and intentionally — not just recklessly — inflicted emotional distress upon the Greenbergs.

“It’s a steep climb but not an impossible climb … you have a fighting chance,” Erdos said.

Following the hearing, Podraza said he always knew it would be an uphill battle but he’s “ecstatic” Erdos has given his clients an opportunity.

“We’re cautiously optimistic and it’s a steep hill, but I think we’re gonna get over it,” he said.

All defense attorneys declined to comment after the hearing.

Joshua and Sandra Greenberg attended the hearing but had to leave early to catch their flight home to Florida, where they’ve recently retired.

Sandra Greenberg said it was the first time she and her husband sat in a courtroom and listened to arguments in their daughter’s case.

“I feel like we’re advocating for her,” she said. “I feel she deserves justice and I want to hope that she’s proud of us.”

The suit is one of two that the Greenbergs and Podraza are currently fighting in court.

Their first civil suit was filed in 2019 and seeks to have the manner of Greenberg’s death changed from suicide back to homicide or undetermined. That suit is awaiting a hearing date before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, which agreed to take the case up on an appeal the Greenbergs filed to a 2023 Commonwealth Court ruling. In that 2-1 opinion, Commonwealth Court judges called authorities investigation into the case “deeply flawed” yet said they had “no choice under the law” but to side with the city.

During his remarks from the bench Wednesday, Erdos said, “I don’t think anyone disagrees the crime scene should have been handled differently,” and said while he was not there to rule on a cause of a death, “The fact the death certificate still lists the cause of death as suicide is puzzling.”

Podraza filed the suit at the heart of this week’s hearing as a result of new information obtained through discovery and depositions in the first suit about the unusual process around how Greenberg’s death was classified and about whether authorities knew and failed to disclose that one of the wounds to her neck was possibly administered after she died.

Greenberg, 27, a first-grade teacher at Juniata Park Academy, was found by her fiancé, Samuel Goldberg, in the kitchen of their Venice Lofts apartment in Manayunk with a 10-inch knife lodged into her chest on Jan. 26, 2011.

Investigators on the scene treated her death as a suicide because Goldberg told them the apartment door was locked from the inside and he had to break it down to get in, there were no signs of an intruder, and Greenberg had no defensive wounds, police have said.

But the next morning at autopsy, Osbourne discovered a total of 20 stab wounds to Greenberg’s body, including 10 to the back of her neck, along with 11 bruises in various stages of healing, and ruled her death a homicide.

Police publicly disputed the findings and Osbourne later changed his ruling to suicide. The Greenbergs subsequently retained numerous independent forensic experts who have questioned authorities’ findings, as first detailed in a March 2019 Inquirer report.

In the October 2022 suit, Podraza and the Greenbergs allege that police “embarrassingly botched” their investigation on scene the night of Ellen Greenberg’s death and a “contemptible conspiracy” has continued for more than 13 years since to cover it up.

The suit alleges that investigators took Goldberg at his word that his fiancé's death was a suicide and they did not call the Crime Scene Unit or secure the scene. The following day, police approved a cleaning service to sanitize the apartment, a service which was paid for by members of Goldberg’s family, and they allowed Goldberg’s relatives to enter the apartment and remove items from it, including a cell phone and two laptop computers belonging to Greenberg, which police later requested back as evidence, according to the suit.

When Osbourne ruled the death a homicide, homicide investigators, including Cooney and McNamee, had to investigate a scene that was already cleaned and compromised, the suit contends.

“After Osbourne had ruled Ellen’s death a homicide, but having allowed any evidence that might assist with a homicide investigation to be destroyed, the police had to convince the MEO (or enlist their help) to change Ellen’s manner of death to suicide to avoid exposing their botched investigation,” Podraza claims in the suit.

On Jan. 29, 2011, a police spokesperson told the Inquirer that despite the homicide ruling, authorities were “leaning” toward suicide in Greenberg’s death and looking into “mental issues” she might have had.

Greenberg was dealing with anxiety and was prescribed antianxiety and sleep aid medications. Greenberg’s psychiatrist told police Greenberg felt overwhelmed at work, but “there was never any feeling of suicidal thoughts.” She did not leave a note.

The Greenbergs’ suit alleges police supplied Osbourne with false information that a building doorman was with Goldberg when he broke the door down, “in order to pressure Osbourne into changing his homicide determination.” In interviews with the Inquirer and others, the doorman denied being present when Goldberg entered the apartment.

But in depositions, Osbourne testified police told him the doorman witnessed Goldberg breaking down the door, a corroboration which he said factored into his decision to switch his ruling from homicide to suicide.

Another factor, Osbourne said, was an opinion he sought from Lucy Rorke-Adams, a renowned neuropathologist, during an informal “curbside exam” of Greenberg’s spinal column. Osbourne said Rorke-Adams determined that Greenberg’s spinal cord injuries were not so severe to have rendered her incapable of inflicting the subsequent wounds to herself, including the final wound to her chest.

Rorke-Adams told The Inquirer in 2018 that she had no recollection of conducting the exam and that since no report or bill for her services exists, “I would conclude that I did not see the specimen in question, although there is a remote possibility that it was shown to me.”

The Greenbergs’ suit claims Osbourne fabricated the opinion by Rorke-Adams “to clear the way for the trumped-up suicide finding the police were pressing.”

Following a meeting in early February 2011 between members of the police department and ME’s Office, Osbourne told police he was changing the manner of Greenberg’s death from homicide to suicide, two months before formally revising her death certificate, according to the suit.

Eight years later, amid mounting pressure from the Greenbergs, Gulino, who at that point was still the medical examiner, asked Emery, a pathologist in his office with neuropathology training, to examine a section of Greenberg’s spinal column still in storage.

In her deposition in the earlier suit, Emery testified that she made no opinion as to the manner of Greenberg’s death and she found nothing that would have incapacitated her, but she did find two cuts to the back of her spinal column — one to the bone and ligaments and a corresponding cut to the dura — that showed no hemorrhaging around them.

“Lack of hemorrhage means no pulse,” she testified.

When asked by Podraza during her deposition if the lack of hemorrhaging would weigh more in suggesting Greenberg was dead when the wound was administered, Emery replied “Yes.”

A month after her deposition, the city filed a written declaration by Emery, in which she said she didn’t fully understand the scope of questions posed to her at deposition and presented several other possibilities for the lack of hemorrhaging including: that nothing was injured along the wound path; that bleeding in other areas of the body prevented bleeding in that area; or that the injury could have been done at the time of autopsy.

A written report of Emery’s exam was never filed and Podraza only learned about her findings two years later, during his deposition of her for the Greenbergs’ first civil suit. According to the second civil suit, Gulino said he intended to create a report of Emery’s findings, but was “instructed by a Philadelphia solicitor not to prepare anything in writing because the Greenbergs had filed a lawsuit.” Gulino also said Emery’s written declaration after her testimony was solely motivated by the city solicitor’s office, the 2022 suit claims.

Since the Inquirer first reported on questions surrounding Ellen Greenberg’s death in 2019, the case has gained national attention. It made headlines again this summer when Gov. Josh Shapiro was on the short list as a potential vice presidential candidate for Kamala Harris. During his tenure as state attorney general, Shapiro’s office reviewed the case and stood by the city’s suicide ruling.

Erdos is expected to deliver his ruling on the remaining defendants’ motion for summary judgment by Jan. 31.

Podraza said the ruling will not affect the Greenbergs’ earlier case awaiting arguments before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, which he expects to happen in the first quarter of 2025.