SARASOTA, Fla. (Court TV) — A new chapter of drama has begun for the family at the center of the Netflix documentary “Take Care of Maya,” as it has filed a lawsuit against its previous trial attorneys, accusing them of professional malpractice.
Maya Kowalski testified in court on Oct. 9, 2023. (Court TV)
Maya Kowalski and her family won their lawsuit against Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in 2023 after claiming that the hospital had held Maya prisoner and led to her mother’s death by suicide. The lawsuit, filed in 2018, alleged that the hospital’s treatment of Maya, who suffers from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, amounted to child abuse and false imprisonment. The jury agreed and awarded the family more than $250 million dollars. That amount was later reduced to $213.5 million; in 2025, a Florida appeals court struck down the judgment in its entirety and remanded the case for retrial.
At the trial for the civil lawsuit, the Kowalski family was represented by the law firm GlennAnderson, led by married couple Greg and Jennifer Anderson. Now, the Kowalski family has filed a lawsuit against the Andersons and their firm, accusing them of professional malpractice.
The 32-page complaint, reviewed by Court TV, accuses the attorneys of charging excessive fees during the pendency of the case and misappropriating funds after the jury’s ruling.
After the jury’s ruling, because the judgment was still tied up in appeals, the Kowalskis say that Greg Anderson and Jennifer Anderson directed them to take out a $42 million loan from third-party lenders. Greg Anderson led the charge on the loan, working as litigation counsel and taking on roles related to collateral, account control and administration of the transaction, the Kowalskis said.
The initial agreement, signed by the Kowalskis in 2017, provides that AndersonGlenn was entitled to receive a fee of “40% of any recovery up to $1 million, plus 33% of any portion of the recovery above $1 million.” The Kowalskis’ new lawsuit alleges that those numbers violate limitations imposed by the Florida Bar Association and would require court approval, which was never sought in this case. The lawsuit quotes an email where Greg Anderson appears to acknowledge the discrepancy: “To make sure we are following Bar Rules the best we can without destroying your case in the process, we escrowed the difference between the Bar recommendations and the 33.33%. It’s all still sitting there in the Kowalski/Anderson trust.”
Approximately $30 million was paid out of the loan, with $15 million going to the Kowalskis’ investment account. The Kowalskis claim in their suit that while the bulk of the remainder was supposed to be held in a “non-IOTA trust,” the other half of the money appeared to be diverted to attorneys’ fees and charges, despite repeated assurances from the Andersons that their money was safe. By 2025, the complaint says, Greg Anderson had “admitted that the $4 million that had been transferred to a different account was pledged collaterally for a loan so Greg and Jennifer could borrow millions of dollars from the bank to buy a new multi-million-dollar house.” Other payments from the fund allegedly went to one of the Andersons ‘ nieces, “a payment to Doc’s Yacht Brokerage for $25,000 in connection with the purchase of a Freemason boat, and the purchase of hours on a private jet.”
The Kowalskis say in their complaint that while Greg Anderson had told them he was trying to pay down the firm’s debt that had been incurred during the trial, the funds actually “included money to pay $827,840.99 on a mortgage on Greg and Jennifer’s vacation home in Idaho and over $150,000 attributable to pay Greg and Jennifer’s various American Express cards.”
The lawsuit says that the Kowalskis have now defaulted on the loan and are being charged 16% interest.
In a statement to Court TV, Jennifer Anderson said, “We categorically deny any allegations of wrongdoing and are truly saddened and stunned, as anyone with a sense of understanding of what this eight-year litigation took to assist the Kowalskis, personally, from our own family. We will continue to abide by the Court’s decisions in these matters. We hope that there will be a fair resolution as soon as possible.”
