Pro bono

July 25, 2024

A team of our attorneys, Brian Rubin, John Coffron, Svetlanna Espinosa-Valdes, Aleeza Kanner, Brighid O’Donoghue, Teddy Smith, Julia Webb, and summer associate Ana Santana,  secured a terrific victory for a mom and her four children from Honduras. The mother was raped by a stranger (resulting in the birth of one daughter) and physically abused by the father of the other three children. The father also abused and abandoned the children. In addition, a gang threatened and assaulted the mom who eventually escaped to the US to secure a better life for herself and her children.  

The Eversheds Sutherland team initially represented the children in a Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) proceeding, which is an immigration classification available to certain undocumented immigrants under the age of 21 who have been abused, neglected or abandoned by one or both parents. It provides a way for juvenile immigrants to apply for and obtain legal permanent residence in the US. Among the legal issues the team had to address were (1) helping the court understand that we could not provide the name for one of the defendant fathers because he was an unknown assailant; and (2) figuring out how to serve the other father in Honduras—it turns out that in DC you can serve someone through Facebook. On the day of the virtual hearing, the team quickly faced some additional hurdles, including the judge requiring that the team change its list of witnesses, the subjects about which they could testify and which attorneys from the team could participate. The team and our clients took it all in stride, and the day ended well for our client. The judge found that it was in the children’s best interest to stay in the US with their mom. The kids are now on the road to becoming US citizens. We worked with Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) on this case. Next up, we are trying to obtain political asylum for the mom. 

The mom and some of the children cried from joy when the judge announced her decision. The mom (who wanted to be a lawyer when she was living in Honduras) thanked the team profusely and said, “You know my story. I have cried with you. You are like family.”  

Thanks to the team’s incredible work on this case, KIND’s Washington DC office selected them as the 2024 Pro Bono Team of the Year, recognizing their exceptional contributions to KIND cases and unwavering resolve in their pro bono case work.

May 5, 2024

Several of our New York attorneys and commercial clients participated in a hybrid training to launch a signature pro bono project led by Cliff Kirsch. In partnership with the Legal Services of New Jersey (LSNJ) and the Julia Anne Kirsch Foundation, this project helps families in need obtain guardianship over their disabled children when they turn 18.

“This program arises out of a desperate need identified by the Julia Kirsch Foundation, which serves disabled individuals and their families in the New Jersey area. Guardianship will provide an important tool for families caring for their adult children. So glad to be teaming with LSNJ in launching this program.” - Cliff Kirsch, Partner, New York

April 22, 2024

Regis Worley, Lydia Florez and Rich Noland represented a former Navy Sailor who sought assistance for a discharge upgrade after having been discharged from the Navy with a status that was less than “Honorable.” The client had a number of significant traumatic experiences while serving shipboard in the Navy, which ultimately led to his deteriorated mental health and his attempted suicide. Though his record reflected positive performance evaluations throughout his military career, he was involuntarily separated following a diagnosis of a mental health condition. He was not provided any retention warning counseling prior to the discharge. Because he was provided a discharge status that was less than “Honorable,” he was not eligible for certain veteran support and benefits for which he was otherwise eligible. We appealed the discharge status to the Naval Discharge Review Board on the basis of his honest and faithful service to the Navy, which was not consistent with his discharge status and reflected significant negative aspects of his service that outweighed the positive aspects of his service. The Naval Discharge Review Board agreed with us and granted our request to change his discharge status to “Honorable.” Following receipt of the decision from the Naval Discharge Review Board, the client wrote to us, saying: 

“Thank you so much for all the effort you put into this matter. Although it may have seemed trivial, it was very important to me, and I am eternally grateful.”

“As an active member of the Reserve Component of the Navy, this case is especially moving to me, as I am familiar with our Sailors’ hard work and sacrifices that span the duration of their service, and I am honored to have helped correct the inequities incurred at the end of this Sailor’s honorable career with the Navy.” - Regis Worley, Counsel, San Diego

February 27, 2024

In partnership with the Pro Bono Partnership of Atlanta (PBPA), we created a pilot “Vital Signs” Forms Clinic where Eversheds Sutherland volunteers met with very small nonprofits that often don’t meet eligibility requirements to become clients of PBPA. Our attorneys assisted these local nonprofits with their legal liability forms essential to their operations, ensuring these organizations could continue their important work in the community.

November 14, 2024

On World Refugee Day 2024, we marked the first anniversary of our global partnership with the International Rescue Committee ('IRC'). Founded in 1933, the IRC’s mission is to ‘help people affected by humanitarian crises to survive, recover and gain control over their future.’ We provide the IRC with financial and pro bono support to help ensure its focus can remain on supporting those most in need across the 40+ countries where the IRC works with its local partners. We are pleased to report that in the first year of our global partnership, we recorded over 1,200 hours on more than 40 different pro bono matters for the IRC involving colleagues from across the globe and multiple jurisdictions. Examples of some of the projects we have supported pro bono during the first year of our partnership include:

• Preparing a Global Data Privacy Policy
• Advising on AI provisions in various commercial agreements, including in relation to an AI-driven software subscription that would allow the IRC’s HR team to generate learning content
• Supporting the IRC with the legal and commercial framework around its flagship Signpost programme, which gives those displaced by humanitarian crises access to quick and secure support and advice
• Advising on real estate projects across the IRC’s US offices
• Providing employment law advice and training in a number of jurisdictions, and free places on our external International Employment Law courses for the IRC’s HR and legal teams
• Participating in legal research projects to support the IRC’s US RAI Immigration Programme
• Ensured compliance with new UK procurement regulations and updated a suite of documents issued to UK programming partners
  

November 1, 2023

Maggie Pope and Cliff Muller successfully assisted a veteran in a discharge upgrade case through the National Veterans Legal Services Program. Our client was an Army Heavy Anti-Armor Weapons Infantryman deployed to Panama, where he was shot in the ankle by Panamanian fighters, and in a subsequent incident, he jumped out of a plane with shots being fired all around him. He later deployed to Iraq as a “combat lifesaver,” assisting those who were injured or wounded. He was awarded a Combat Infantryman Badge. Following his deployments, he began to experience marital issues and requested “early out” from the military. Shortly after filing this “early out” paperwork, his acting platoon sergeant began to harass him incessantly, leading him to go absent without leave. He was discharged with an “Other than Honorable” characterization. He applied twice for a discharge upgrade on his own and was denied. Post-discharge, he worked at nonprofits focused on treating adolescent drug and alcohol use, including serving as the Program Administrator for the only anti-smoking program directed at American Indians in the entire country, and contributed his time and resources to many social justice programs. He was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), based on combat stressors in both Panama and Iraq, but the VA determined he was ineligible for benefits due to his discharge characterization. Maggie and Cliff filed a brief at the Army Board for Correction of Military Records seeking an upgrade. They argued that the veteran’s mental health condition from combat mitigated and outweighed his misconduct. They further set forth his outstanding post-discharge conduct. The Board upgraded his discharge to “General (Under Honorable Conditions),” even though there was no documentation of a mental health condition in his military service records. The Board stated: “Even if PTSD was undiagnosed at the time of service, it is reasonable that psychiatric sequelae of combat impacted the behavior, ultimately leading to discharge.” Applying liberal consideration, the Board concluded that his PTSD mitigated his misconduct.

March 1, 2024

Eversheds Sutherland filed an amicus brief on behalf of Human Rights for Kids in a First Amendment case before the US Supreme Court regarding how to determine whether pure speech is a “true threat,” exempting it from protection of the First Amendment.

We argued that to meet the “true threat” exception—meaning an individual can be prosecuted for pure speech—the speech at issue must be both objectively threatening to a reasonable listener and specifically intended by the speaker to constitute a threat, evaluated in the context of the totality of the circumstances. Many states and federal circuits employ an objective-only test, effectively criminalizing negligent speech. We wrote to bring to the court’s attention the impact of its choice of a mens rea standard on the rights of children, especially in light of their inveterate use of social media. Although still kids, they are subject to adult criminal sanctions for speech involving threats because of transfer laws that allow them to be prosecuted in adult court. Children, with their cognitive immaturity and heavy use of social media for communicating, are especially at risk for online misunderstandings that could result in overcriminalization of their speech without both an objective and subjective review of the facts and circumstances.

April 1, 2022

Nine years ago, we began representing “J” in an asylum case. A few days ago, she and her son became US citizens.

Traditionally, asylum cases involve people who fear returning to their country because they will face persecution based on religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group. Here, J feared returning to her home country of Rwanda because she would face physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, and possibly death at the hands of her husband—and her country would not protect her.

J managed to escape to America in 2011 after enduring nearly two decades of her husband’s abuse. In 1990, she had been forced to marry him after he kidnapped and raped her. Over the next 20 years, she continued to suffer from his abuse, enduring almost daily beatings and worse. He similarly abused her three children and raped her younger sister. During her marriage, Rwandan law and culture did not recognize rape and physical abuse within a marriage as a crime. Therefore, J was unable to seek and receive help and protection from the Rwandan authorities.  

J came to our law firm through Catholic Charities to seek help with filing an asylum petition. Her case presented two difficult legal issues. First, the only cognizable grounds on which J could claim asylum—her extensive domestic abuse in Rwanda—was relatively unsettled law. In fact, the first reported decision recognizing domestic abuse as a legal grounds for asylum was issued only one week before her asylum hearing in 2014. As a result, her petition required extensive briefing not only on her story and substantive asylum law, but also on the history of domestic violence in Rwanda and how married women are treated in Rwandan culture. Second, asylum applicants are generally required to file an asylum petition within one year of entering the country. Due to the circumstances of how J entered the US and her ongoing trauma, she did not file for asylum until nearly three years later, well outside of the statutory deadline.  

Despite these legal hurdles, following multiple briefings and a hearing, J and her son were recommended for approval for a grant of asylum in 2014. And a few days ago, J texted us with the following note: “I want to say thank you so much for your help. I’m really happy with everything you’ve done to help us. And thank you to everyone so much who helped us.” 

The following past and present Eversheds Sutherland attorneys and staff helped J and her son become two of our newest US citizens: Nancy Benson, Carmen Brun, Amanda Callais, Liz Cha, Ariana Cheng, Nicole Chessin, Lynne Dudurich, Irene Foster, Shawn Johnson, Katherine Kelly, Charlie Kruly, Sandy LoJacono, Amanda Oliveira, Kristin Rininger, Brian Rubin, Katie Sabo and Lauren Shor.  

February 14, 2023

We recently secured a significant victory on behalf of a pro bono client who had been wrongly imprisoned for more than 32 years. 

Despite having an alibi, our client was first convicted (non-unanimously) of rape in 1991 and has been serving his sentence in Louisiana’s Angola prison ever since. The victim originally told police that she did not know the perpetrator but then accused our client, a neighbor she knew well, of the crime 15 days later. Our client has always maintained his innocence, and no physical evidence linked him to the crime.

In 2020, Melissa Fox (Counsel, US), took on the case with the Promise of Justice Initiative (PJI) to challenge non-unanimous jury verdicts. The Supreme Court had ruled such verdicts to be unconstitutional in the Ramos v. Louisiana case in 2020 – only Louisiana and Oregon had permitted them. Unfortunately, for our client, the US Supreme Court in 2021 and the Louisiana Supreme Court in 2022 ruled that Ramos was not retroactive so could not be relied upon by our client and our other clients who had completed their direct appeals.   

However, our client's family hired an investigator who identified a new witness whom we interviewed. This new witness had a relationship with the victim two years after the supposed event. The victim had told him that her mother’s then boyfriend had committed the crime, and that her mother had threatened to throw her out of the house if she reported him. This new witness had learned of our client’s conviction and, based on what the victim had told him, agreed to testify for our client (whom he did not know) at a new hearing. 

At Melissa’s suggestion, we and PJI expanded the scope of our representation of our client to include a new actual innocence claim, necessary to get around procedural bars from his prior post-conviction challenges.  

Samantha Darnell (Associate, US) joined the team to help draft the petition based on actual innocence and Cyndie Wyke-Garrett (Paralegal Specialist, US) supported the team throughout the entire representation. Melissa filed that petition based on actual innocence supported by an affidavit from the new witness, and engaged in negotiations with the D.A.’s office. In responding to our petition, the D.A. noted that there were real concerns about the guilty verdict in this case, and expressly waived (in our client's case) the non-retroactivity defense to our Ramos claim.

In 2023, after Melissa made a proffer of what our evidence would show, the judge declared that the state had never proven our client's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and vacated his conviction based on the non-unanimous jury verdict. This could have permitted a new trial, and Melissa asked that a reasonable bond be set so that our client could be freed while the state considered this. The Assistant D.A. then stated that the State would not retry this case, resulting in our client being freed that same day.

Our client and his family are extremely pleased with the result.

March 16, 2023

Eversheds Sutherland is proud to be nominated for this year’s Collaboration Award at the TrustLaw Awards!

This award showcases highly effective working relationships between pro bono providers and recipients that exemplify the power and best practices of pro bono. Eversheds Sutherland partnered with the Thomson Reuters Foundation and Argentinean nonprofit Sustentabilidad sin Fronteras on researching best practices on climate change regulations in South America, a pro bono project to develop a comparative study on climate change legislation in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Paraguay and Peru (all of which have ratified the Paris Agreement).

US Associates Ana Rocio Monzón Woc, Natalia Cosío Ondiviela, and Claudia Chafloque Siu drafted the chapter on Chile’s legislation, which was published in the final report along with other law firms' contributions.

Legal support in this capacity is an important factor that can help shift the dial on pressing social issues. It is an honor to be recognized by the Thomson Reuters Foundation alongside other leading law firms. View the full publication (which is in Spanish).