Congress passed a series of reforms in 1996 seeking to reign in the left-wing activism of legal aid lawyers receiving federal money from the Legal Services Corporation. These reforms, however, have not kept legal services groups nationwide from engaging in questionable litigation that continues to clog America’s overcrowded court system. Apart from the issue of whether legal services groups are following the restrictions imposed by Congress, many cases, such as those described here, simply have little or no merit and do little to advance the legal interests of the deserving poor legal services is supposed to be helping.
Legal Services Claims Bogus Marriage In Seeking Welfare Benefits
For Client
Legal Aid of Western Oklahoma claimed in federal court that its client,
Genia Brougham, had been married to a recently deceased man in order to
extract Social Security survivor’s benefits from the federal government
for Ms. Brougham and for her children as the deceased man’s “stepchildren.”
Both the administrative law judge and the appeals court hearing the case
determined that no such marriage ever existed and that Ms. Brougham was
not entitled to the man’s Social Security benefits. As it turns out,
the deceased man had claimed his parents’ residence as his own on his tax
returns, and Ms. Brougham herself had described the man as “a friend” in
prior applications for welfare benefits.
See Brougham v. Apfel, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 32233 (10th Cir., December 24, 1998).
Legal Aid Supports Employee’s Refusal to Take Alcohol Test
Legal Aid Service of Northeast Minnesota, which receives federal taxpayer
money, filed an appeal in state court seeking unemployment benefits for
Leslie Kukkonen, who was fired after he refused to take a blood alcohol
test required by his employer. In denying Kukkonen’s request for
benefits, the appeals court noted that Kukkonen had failed these tests
twice before and both Kukkonen’s supervisor and the doctor examining Kukkonen
smelled alcohol on his breath. By providing support for alcoholism
in the workplace in this case, legal services appears to be hurting the
best interests of the poor whom it is supposed to be helping.
See Kukkonen v. MDI Government Service, 1999 Minn. App. LEXIS 155 (Minn. App., February 16, 1999).
Depression Claimed As Grounds For Disability Benefits
New Orleans Legal Assistance (NOLA) argued that the following symptoms
of clinical depression, as described in a federal court’s opinion, were
sufficient grounds for Michael Hultgren to gain federal SSI disability
benefits: “Plaintiff has difficulty with authority and continuity,
cannot cope with instructions or criticism, isolates himself, and has difficulty
communicating with others. . . [i]n the past, plaintiff worked as a maintenance
worker, bartender, cook, and oil field dispatcher.” Although Hultgren
also suffered a back injury in 1993, NOLA appears to have focused on Hultgren’s
depressive condition as grounds for SSI eligibility in its appearance before
the appeals court. NOLA made this claim even though Hultgren had
a substantial work history while suffering from this condition--which prompted
the court to deny NOLA’s claims. This case appears to present another
example of legal services lawyers using a case-by-case approach to expand
welfare benefits to those not currently eligible for them.
See Hultgren v. Social Security Administration, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20109 (E.D. La, December 18, 1998)