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)