|
|
|
|
|
Public Justice (formerly Trial
Lawyers for Public Justice) opened its doors 25 years ago to pursue an inspiring
vision -- building the
trial lawyers' public
interest law firm. We
have done that and more. Over the past quarter century, no public interest law
firm in the country has been involved in a broader range of high-impact,
cutting-edge litigation. So we've become Public Justice to pursue an expanded,
inspiring vision -- building
America's public
interest law firm.
Public Justice fights for
justice through precedent-setting and socially significant individual and class
action litigation designed to enhance
consumer and victims' rights, environmental protection and safety, civil rights and civil liberties, workers' rights, America's civil justice system,
and the protection of the poor and powerless. Our
Access to
Justice Campaign
keeps the courthouse doors open to all by battling federal preemption of injury victims'
rights,
unfair mandatory arbitration, class action
bans and abuse, unnecessary
secrecy in the courts, attacks on the right to counsel and jury trial, and
unconstitutional legislation.
Public Justice is the
principal project of the Public Justice Foundation, a non-profit
membership organization.
We are supported by – and can
call on – a nationwide network of over 3,500 attorneys and others,
including trial lawyers, appellate lawyers, consumer advocates, constitutional
litigators, employment lawyers, environmental attorneys, civil rights lawyers,
class action specialists, law professors and law students. Public Justice and the Public Justice Foundation
are headquartered in Washington, D.C., and have a West Coast Office in Oakland,
California.
If you're not a member, please join us or contribute.
If you need our help, please
call on us. And please sign up for
free Public Justice E-lerts to receive
updates on our cutting-edge
litigation and activities.
New Mexico Supreme Court Blasts World Finance’s Arbitration
Scheme
Unanimous Decision Favors Borrowers and Consumers Who Were
Targeted by One-Sided Clause
|
Laura Cordova |
The New Mexico State Supreme Court
Wednesday excoriated a major short-term
lender’s one-sided consumer contract,
which the company – World Finance – used
as license to harass and intimidate its
customers, all the while charging
exorbitant interest rates for the loans.
The decision in Cordova v. World
Finance brings a measure of justice to
hard-pressed borrowers who faced
lawsuits if they fell behind on their
payments, but who had to rely on
arbitration by a third party under
contract with World Finance if they were
wronged by the lender.
Wrote the Court, "Applying the
settled standards of New Mexico
unconscionability law, we conclude that
World Finance's self-serving arbitration
scheme it imposed on its borrowers is so
unfairly and unreasonably one-sided that
it is substantively unconscionable."
READ MORE
Alaska
Supreme Court Adopts “Bright-Line Rule” that Spares Workers
Substantial Arbitration Costs in Employment Actions
Court
also strikes one-sided appellate review provision as
unreasonably favorable to employer
In a victory for workers who seek to
vindicate their rights under the Alaska
Wage and Hour Act (AWHA), the Alaska
Supreme Court held on April 3 that
employers may not require their
employees to arbitrate their wage and
hour claims unless the employer is
willing to pay all of the costs of
arbitration. Public Justice was
co-counsel for Larry Gibson, the
employee plaintiff in this appeal, along
with Alaska civil rights specialist Ken
Legacki of Anchorage.
Public Justice urged the Court to adopt
a “bright-line rule” that would outlaw
employers from imposing mandatory
pre-dispute binding arbitration clauses
where the employees would be required to
pay significant arbitration costs to
bring claims under the AWHA. The Court
agreed with Public Justice that a
“bright-line rule” is indeed necessary
in AWHA cases because “substantial forum
costs would run counter” to the AWHA’s
policies of deterring employers from
violating the act and encouraging
employees to take action to remedy
violations.
READ MORE
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects
Federal Preemption Claims in Prescription Drug Labeling,
'Light' Cigarette Fraud Cases
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued
two resoundingly pro-consumer decisions
rejecting federal preemption of
state-law claims involving injured
consumers.
In a March 4 ruling, the Court held
6-to-3 that federal law does not preempt
lawsuits against prescription drug
manufacturers for failing to warn of
their drug's dangers. Public Justice had
filed amici briefs in both cases urging
the Court to rule as it did.
Not long before that, in another case
critical to consumers, the Court held
5-to-4 that federal law does not preempt
– or. wipeout – lawsuits against tobacco
companies for defrauding the public by
advertising that their “light”
cigarettes deliver less tar and nicotine
than “regular” cigarettes.
FULL STORY
Third Circuit Rules that American Express May Not Escape
Liability for Cheating Consumers by Banning Class Actions
In a triumph for consumers in New Jersey
and across the country, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Third Circuit on
February 24, held that held that the
Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not
preempt—or wipe away—state laws that
protect consumers from abusive contract
terms.
In Homa v. American Express Company,
the court emphatically rejected American
Express’s attempt to immunize itself
from liability by banning class actions
and choosing less protective state law
to govern its contracts with its
customers.
“This is one of the most important
consumer protection cases in years,”
said Paul Bland, the Public Justice
staff attorney who argued the case
on behalf of the plaintiffs.
“Corporations like American Express
have been pushing the envelope,
trying to use contractual class
action bans to avoid accountability
for cheating their customers, and
arguing that federal arbitration law
allows them to this. The Third
Circuit saw through this, and
recognized that this case was not
about arbitration at all. It is an
extremely well-reasoned decision
that is likely to be influential
throughout the country.”
FULL STORY
Egregious Medical Neglect Leads to Another Detainee's Death;
Public Justice Joins Lawsuit Battling 'Unconscionable
System'
Public Justice, the national public
interest law firm known for
championing immigrant detainees’
rights, joined a federal lawsuit
Thursday against detention
facilities in Virginia that caused
the December 2005 death of Sandra
Kenley, a lawful permanent resident
from Barbados.
The suit charges the administrators
and health care providers at two
southern Virginia regional jails –
Pamunkey Regional Jail in Hanover
and Hampton Roads Regional Jail in
Portsmouth – with medical negligence
resulting in Ms. Kenley’s wrongful
death and a violation of Ms.
Kenley’s constitutional right to
adequate medical care. Kenley had
been suffering from an oversized
fibroid tumor, high cholesterol and
high blood pressure when she was
taken into custody.
On the day she died, Kenley passed
out, face down, in her cell at the
Hampton Roads facility. Her cell
mate called for help for
approximately 20 minutes, but
officials did not respond until it
was too late, according to the
complaint.
“Ms. Kenley received shoddy medical
care at the Pamunkey and Hampton
Roads facilities, which led to her
death,” said Bernard J. DiMuro of
Alexandria, Va., Public Justice’s
lead counsel in the case. “Ms.
Kenley’s medical condition was
easily treatable, but both
facilities allowed her condition to
deteriorate, ignoring her frequent
pleas for help.”
The suit, pending in U.S. District
Court in Norfolk, was filed by
Kenley’s sister, June Everett, and
marks the fourth time Public Justice
has taken on the country’s
immigration detention system for its
medical neglect of detainees.
FULL STORY
|
Public Justice Suit Prompts Indiana High School Athletic
Association to Allow Girls Opportunity to Participate in
'America's Pasttime '
Association's Rules Still Discriminate Against Girls in
Other Ways
Logan Young |
High school girls in Indiana may now try
out for their high schools' baseball
teams, even if their teammates may be
all boys, thanks to a federal lawsuit
filed by Public Justice and its
cooperating counsel late last year.
The lawsuit, filed in November on behalf
of a 14-year-old Bloomington, Ind.,
girl, has prompted the Executive
Committee of the Indiana High School
Athletic Association (IHSAA) to adopt an
emergency rule permitting girls to try
out for their high school baseball
teams. Public Justice had charged that
the previous rule, which prohibited
girls from trying out for baseball if
their school offered softball, violated
both the U.S. Constitution and Title IX,
the federal law that prohibits
discrimination in educational
programs.
Together with the law firm Hangley,
Aronchick, Segal & Pudlin in
Philadelphia, PA, Public Justice had
been advocating for a change in the rule
since February of last year. A lawsuit
was filed by Logan Young, a freshman at
Bloomington High School South, only
after the IHSAA failed to take action to
correct its discriminatory rule for nine
months.
Logan has played baseball for nearly her
entire life, but was barred from trying
out for baseball as a freshman by the
former IHSAA rule. Logan, and other
girls like her, will now have the
opportunity to participate in high
school baseball and be judged based on
their abilities, instead of their
gender.
FULL STORY
|
Settlement Reached to Improve Access to Hotels.com and
Expedia Reservation Services for Disabled Travelers
Two
members of AXIS Dance Company were plaintiffs in a
class action against hotels.com, which refused to
guarantee reservations for wheelchair-accessible
rooms. |
Under a settlement announced January 26,
Hotels.com and Expedia.com, two of the
world’s leading online travel companies,
have agreed to add features to their
online travel reservation systems so
that millions of travelers with
disabilities can use their online
services to search for and reserve hotel
rooms that have the accommodations they
need.
Plaintiffs in the California lawsuit
Smith v. Hotels.com L.P. were
represented by the public interest law
firms of Disability Rights Advocates (DRA)
and Public Justice, and a leading class
action law firm in Mill Valley, Calif.,
Chavez & Gertler LLP.
To read the settlement agreement,
click here.
To read the original
complaint,
click here.
As part of the settlement, Hotels.com
and Expedia.com will gather information
about hotels’ accessibility features,
and will then incorporate that
information into their websites so that
travelers can both search for hotels
with rooms that offer the particular
accommodations they need, and make
special requests online to book those
accessible rooms. Each special request
will be given individual attention by a
trained customer service representative,
who will work with the customer to
accommodate his or her needs. These new
features will be rolled out later this
year.
FULL STORY
|
Locate Thousands of Public Interest Organizations, Legal
Resources, and Trial Lawyer Associations
Public Justice has created
a one-of-a-kind online database
for public
interest advocates.
Click here to look up complete contact information for
more than 2,000 public
interest groups, trial
lawyers' associations, legal organizations, and law schools
nationwide, sorted by dozens of focus areas.
|
|
|
|
Access to Justice: keeping courthouse doors open for all.
|
A Firm Commitment
to Diversity
|
|
The Public Justice
trademark is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by the Public
Justice Foundation."America's Public Interest Law Firm," "The Nation's Public
Interest Law Firm," and the Gavel logo trademarks are all registered by Public
Justice, P.C. and are used with permission.
|