On Tuesday, July 27, 1999, the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) will
hold a ceremony commemorating the 25th anniversary of the signing of the
Legal Services Corporation Act. As a result of LSC funding, federal
taxpayers have been forced to support many instances of abusive activities
by left-wing activist lawyers under the guise of "helping the poor."
Despite Congressional 'reform' efforts over the years, these abuses continue
to the present day. The following is just a small sampling of the
350 examples of legal services abuses that NLPC has uncovered over the
years.
Legal Aid Society of Nebraska Assists Child Abuser in Custody Battle
In a shocking case, the Legal Aid Society of Nebraska, an LSC recipient,
represented a child molester attempting to gain custody of a child he had
fathered through the sexual abuse of the child's mother. The molester,
known in the court records as Walter R., impregnated the child's mother
when he was thirty-five years old and she was twelve years old. After
the mother's parental rights were terminated in 1997, Walter R. filed suit
in state court seeking to gain custody of the child, a twelve-year old
girl named Gloria. At trial, it was established that Walter R. had
never before requested visitation with the child nor paid any child support.
The caseworker assigned to Gloria expressed concern that placing Gloria
with Walter R. would expose her to the same type of sexual abuse that happened
to her mother. Indeed, Gloria herself expressed "revulsion" toward's
Walter's sexual abuse of her mother. Both the trial court and the
Nebraska Supreme Court soundly rejected Walter's attempt to gain custody
of Gloria.
See In re Interest of Gloria F. v. Walter R., 577 N.W.2d 296
(Neb. 1998).
Legal Services Represents Teamsters Local Chapter on Behalf of Drug-Using Truck Driver
Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, a Legal Services Corporation
grantee, represented Teamsters Local 299 on behalf of a union member terminated
from his job as a truck driver after he twice tested positive for cocaine.
After the driver, Timothy Lieckfelt, filed a grievance with the union over
his discharge, an arbitrator ruled that Mr. Lieckfelt was improperly terminated
due to procedural errors supposedly committed in testing Mr. Lieckfelt
for drug use. As a result, the arbitrator ordered the company to
reinstate Mr. Lieckfelt and pay back wages and benefits. The company
then filed suit against the union in September 1997 in U.S. District Court
seeking to overturn the arbitrator's award. On May 22, 1998, the
District Court judge granted summary judgment in favor of the company,
noting that the company had complied with every procedural requirement
spelled out in its agreement with the Teamsters. The judge also pointed
out that driving trucks is a "safety critical" job in which companies are
given wide latitude to fire employees who fail drug tests.
See Logistics Personnel Corp. v. Truck Drivers Local Union No. 299,
1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7656 (E.D. Mich. May 22, 1998).
Legal Services Group Represents Recent Arrivals Attempting to Qualify For In-State Tuition At UNC-Greensboro
In a bid to increase the financial burden of both North Carolina taxpayers
and university students, Central Carolina Legal Services, a unit of Legal
Services Corporation of North Carolina, represented two students attending
the University of North Carolina at Greensboro in their 1996 lawsuit arguing
that the students were entitled to in-state tuition at the University.
Both students admitted that they had moved to North Carolina specifically
for the purpose of attending UNC-G, and that both had lived elsewhere until
their studies began. Both state trial and appellate courts ruled
in favor of the University. Although the court considered the case
in a serious manner, it is difficult to fathom how litigating the issue
of in-state tuition at public universities addresses the legal needs of
North Carolina residents living in poverty.
See Norman v. Cameron, 127 N.C. App. 44, 488 S.E. 2d 297 (1997)
Legal Services Sues Salvation Army
In 1992, MFY Legal Services sued the Salvation Army for trying to evict
individuals from one of its charitable facilities. The Salvation Army’s
“Ten Eyck-Troughton Memorial Residence” in Manhattan, provided women of
low to moderate income lodging, meals and other services for modest rents.
When the charity moved to evict some residents for not paying rent, MFY
Legal Services sought to stop the action by challenging its legal status
as a charity. In New York City, charities are not required to go through
the onerous eviction procedures that private landlords must follow. The
Salvation Army’s Eyck-Troughton residence was exempted from these rent
laws because it was operated “exclusively for charitable purposes on a
non-profit basis.” However, in its suit legal services argued that the
religious mission of the Salvation Army disqualified the residence from
being defined as a charity. According to legal services, because religious
activities took place on its premises, then the residence could not be
classified as a facility “exclusively” devoted to charity. A state appeals
court rejected the argument observing that the religious activities in
question were strictly voluntary and that the residence was open to all
women on a nonsectarian basis.
See Salvation Army v. Cruz, 615 N.Y.S. 2d 805, (1994)
Homeless Go On $400,000 Drug and Drinking Binge
In 1991, the Legal Aid Society of Orange County won $400,000 from the
city of Santa Ana for more than 30 homeless persons as compensation for
supposed suffering they experienced when police forcibly removed them from
the grounds of the city civic center. Despite the fact that the vast majority
of the homeless plaintiffs were drug addicts and alcoholics, the settlement
Legal Aid lawyers worked out simply gave each homeless person $11,000 without
any requirements that they get counseling for their maladies. The predictable
result was a wild binge of drunkenness, drug use and outlandish squandering
of money. One homeless person said he used his money to treat his friends
to a night on the town in a limo and looking for all the drugs his money
could buy. Another also admitted to “cruisin” in a luxury car with friends
and getting drunk. One man who fared better than the rest said he found
a nice apartment with a jacuzzi but says he still drinks and has no intention
of getting a job. Within months, of the 31 homeless plaintiffs who received
damage awards, 11 were homeless again, several were running out of money
and some had simply disappeared. Only 9 were legitimately trying to turn
their lives around. All Legal Aid lawyers had to say was that the homeless
were entitled to use the money as they saw fit.
See Gebe Martinez, “Money Didn’t Buy Them Happiness,” Los
Angeles Times, Dec. 2, 1991, pg. A1