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