Antrican v. Buell
-- Played lead role in class action lawsuit filed against NC's
Medicaid program which contends children
and adults on Medicaid do not have adequate access to dental services.
While presently in progress, this lawsuit has given this issue
a high profile in the media and for policymakers even before trial.
Hyatt v. Massanari--Continued to
monitor the enforcement of this class action lawsuit which was
filed against the Social Security Administration 17 years ago
for denying disability benefits to
people whose disability involved pain. We have reviewed and negotiated
class denials and merits denials, tracked all claims on our database,
responded to calls from potential and actual class members, attorneys
and representatives, and referred cases to attorneys. With assistance
of co-counsel, successfully enforced settlement order through
two court motions.
Alexander v. Hooker--Continued
to monitor this class action filed in 1974 by applicants for AFDC
and Medicaid alleging that the administrators of these
programs have failed to comply with federal regulations concerning
the processing of applications for assistance.
Cassell
v. Britt--This
class action case involves a challenge to the method by which
child support is distributed to present
and former AFDC recipients. We are monitoring the consent decree.
Francisco v. State Board of Education of
North Carolina--Resolved this statewide class action filed
on behalf of children of limited English
proficiency who alleged that the state has failed to provide
them with an appropriate education. In response to the litigation,
the state made a number of policy changes while the legislature
increased funding for ESL and other programs.
Huntley v. Morrow--This is a class
action against NC DHHS filed in 1979 concerning the state's failure
to process AFDC, Food Stamps, and Medicaid hearings in
a timely fashion. The project has assumed the responsibility for
continued monitoring of the State's compliance with the consent
order, and negotiations with the state.
Leandro v. State of North Carolina--The
Justice Center is participating in this case challenging
the state's system of public school finance. The case is
presently in trial in the Wake County Superior Court. In these
proceedings the Justice Center has filed friend of the court briefs
and plans to continue to play a role during pivotal stages of
the litigation. The Justice Center is arguing that the system
of education finance must take into account the needs of low income
and minority students.
Thomas v. NC DHHS and USDA--This
case is a class action that involves the failure
of NC DHHS to follow court rulings in food stamp cases.
Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge and Rice, co-counseled with the project
before the North Carolina Supreme Court. The Court upheld the
Court of Appeals' decision allowing the trial to proceed. The
case was settled resulting in benefits to over 1,400 individuals.
Jones v. Southern Atlantic Financial Services--This
case, which is being co-counseled with private counsel, raises
several important predatory lending issues,
including oppressive loan terms and improper fees and behavior
on part of the loan broker. A jury recently awarded the plaintiff
$24,000 in damages and $50,000 in punitive damages.
Harrison v. Cornerstone Realty; Lee v. Cornerstone
Realty--This case, co-counseled with North State Legal
Services, challenged the eviction of two
disabled tenants receiving federal housing subsidies under
the Section 8 Program. The suit was favorably settled.
Cantey v. United Companies Lending (Wake
County Superior Court); Tomlin et al v. Chase Mortgage Brokers;
Chasten et al v. Homegold and ContiMortgage United States Federal
Court (Eastern District); Jones v. Advanta Mortgage and Bankers
Trust Company (Richmond County Superior Court); Clients v. EMC--
These cases involve predatory lending practices
by a number of defendants. The cases are the cornerstone of the
litigation effort to reform predatory lending in North Carolina.
The Justice Center is co-counsel in each of the cases playing
key roles. All cases are pending in trial courts.
McClendon, et al v. Norman and Evelyn Stanley,
(Wake County Superior Court)--This is a class action brought
against one of the state's largest slumlords involving the abusive
practices of the landlord. The case was recently favorably
settled with the defendant being required by Court Order, to have
third party inspections of all his properties before renting them.
Wellman v. Eastern North Carolina School
for the Deaf (Office of Administrative Hearings)-- This
is a race discrimination and retaliatory
discharge claim brought by the Justice Center on behalf
of a State employee in Wilson, NC. This case is part of an alleged
pattern-and-practice of race discrimination at the School for
the Deaf. In June 2000, an Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor
of the plaintiff on all counts. The State Personnel Commission
entered a final decision in December 2000 affirming all of the
ALJ's decision, except for the retaliatory discharge claim. Parties
have negotiated a final resolution to the case and are working
out the final details.
Davis, et al. vs. Winston-Salem Housing
Authority-- This case involves the failure of the W-S Housing
Authority to implement the federal income
exclusion rule and provide restitution to residents denied
the benefit of the rule. The case was recently settled favorable
to the plaintiffs.
Parkwood Association v Capital Health Care
(North Carolina Supreme Court)--This case involves restrictive
covenants to prevent the construction of
group homes for disabled adults and children. The Justice
Center has filed a friend of the court brief in the Court of Appeals.
In the Matter of Investigation of Voluntary
Green and Public Benefit Fund Check-Off Programs; In the Matter
of Petition for Rulemaking to Revise Billing and Collection Procedures
for Telecommunications Companies Regarding Local Disconnection
and Toll Denial; In the Matter of Lifeline and Link-Up Services
Pursuant to Section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996;
In the Matter of Establishment of Universal Support Mechanisms
Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1997; In the Matter
of Petition for Rulemaking to Revise Billing and Collection Procedures
for Telecommunications Companies Regarding Local Disconnection
and Toll Denial -- These proceedings before the Utilities
Commission involve deregulation of utilities, credit and billing
practices and/or access to services for
low income consumers. The Justice Center has intervened
in the proceedings on behalf of low income consumers.
Pineda v. North Carolina Growers Association
et al. (North Carolina Court of Appeals)-- This case involves
a migrant farmworker who was retaliated against after complaining
about health problems resulting from pesticide
exposure. The Justice Center and Legal Services of North
Carolina's Farmworker Unit are appealing from the Wake County
Superior Court decision against the plaintiff.
Beltrán Benitez et al. v. Sea Safari Ltd. et al. (Eastern District
of North Carolina)--
The Justice Center and private attorney Robert Willis filed this
class action complaint in federal court on behalf of a group of
Mexican women working on temporary visas. The complaint alleges
widespread minimum wage and overtime violations.
Client v. Lancaster Farms (North Carolina
Department of Labor)-- The Justice Center filed this administrative
complaint on behalf of a migrant farmworker. The Department of
Labor substantiated the complaint's allegations of field sanitation
violations, lack of personal protective equipment, lack of training
on pesticide safety, and violations of pesticide re-entry periods.
Gayton v. Gage Carolina Metals et al. (North
Carolina Court of Appeals)-- The Justice Center filed an
amicus brief with the North Carolina Court of Appeals in favor
of an undocumented worker's right to receive worker's
compensation benefits.
The Justice Center's Immigrants Legal Assistance
Project (ILAP) served over 300 persons in matters involving a
variety of immigration cases and farmworker cases. The
immigration cases typically included family-based immigration
petitions, asylum cases, and cases involving battered immigrant
women. Examples of ILAP representation include representing clients
under the Haitian Refugee portion of the new immigration bill
and representation of clients from El Salvador in their applications
for legal permanent residence under the Nicaraguan Adjustment
and Central American Relief Act (NACARA). ILAP also handles, cases
involving denial of access to services for immigrants such as
education, driver's licenses, health services, social services,
and the courts.