Jenner & Block

Jenner & Block is proud of its 2019 pro bono results:



May 19, 2016 Firm’s Win Helps DC Legal Services Corporations Recover Reasonable Fees

In Tenants of 710 Jefferson Street v. DC Rental Housing Commission, a firm team won an important victory for the Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia.  The win will affect the way DC courts determine lawyers’ fee awards when the prevailing party is a non-profit legal services corporation.

Please click here to read more.

TAGS: housing

May 12, 2016 Associate Handles DC Pro Bono Clinic Referral of Landlord/Tenant Case

The firm successfully represented a pro bono client who was sued by her landlord in an effort to evict her based on nonpayment of rent and violation of the terms of the lease. On her behalf, the firm pursued a counterclaim to recoup rent she had paid despite serious housing code violations, including flooding in the bathroom over a nine-month period, exposed heating elements and electrical wires, and rodent and cockroach infestations. 

Please click here to read more.

TAGS: housing

May 10, 2016 DCFS Drops Case Against Client Indicated for Neglect

In January 2016, Jenner & Block received a favorable outcome for a pro bono client in an Illinois expungement hearing proceeding. The client, a widow, had been indicated with three counts of neglect for the alleged inadequate care of her autistic daughter. The client maintained that the conditions cited by the state Department of Children and Family Services investigator were the direct result of temporary financial difficulties and that the state investigation was cursory and inadequate. A few weeks before the hearing, DCFS dropped the case and voluntarily unfounded all the indications against the client.

Please click here to read more.


May 5, 2016 Rare Grant of Removal Helps Mother and Young Son

The firm represented the mother of a young boy, who, due to severe physical and mental abuse by the boy’s father, wanted to move to a different state.  The client had an excellent job opportunity there that provided her with a significantly increased salary, greater professional advancement opportunities and tuition reimbursement to pursue a Ph.D. while working.

Please click here to read more.

May 5, 2016 At Supreme Court, Firm Defends Critical Voting Rights Principles

US Supreme Court Pro BonoJenner & Block was significantly involved in the two state legislative redistricting cases that were before the US Supreme Court in the October 2015 term, examining the “one-person, one-vote” principle.

  • In Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC), the Court upheld  the legislative map created by the AIRC, a five-member independent commission established by Arizona voters in 2000. A group of Arizona voters had claimed that in the redistricting that followed the 2010 census, the AIRC violated the “one-person, one-vote” principle by deliberately putting too many voters in 16 Republican districts and too few in 11 Democratic districts. In his oral argument to the Court on behalf of the AIRC, Partner Paul M. Smith contended that what the challengers characterized as partisanship was, in fact, a good faith effort by the AIRC to comply with pre-Shelby County v. Holder requirements of the Voting Rights Act and that the deviations in numbers of voters were minor and made for a legitimate purpose.  The Court’s opinion explained that the Constitution does not demand “mathematical perfection” in distributing residents among legislative districts.

    Please click here to read more about the Court's decision.
  • In Evenwel v. Abbott, the Court agreed with the points made in an amicus brief the firm filed on behalf of four former directors of the US Census Bureau. In Evenwel, two Texas voters had contended that legislative districting should be based on voter-eligible population numbers, rather than on total population numbers. Texas and nearly all other states and local governments use total population figures published by the US Census Bureau every decade, for redistricting purposes. The firm’s brief contended that there is no data available to support the argument that states should be constitutionally required to draw district boundaries based on numbers of voting-age citizens or registered voters and that total population figures are the most accurate source of data and satisfy the Equal Protection Clause.  The Court ruled that states are not constitutionally required to divide districts by voting population.

    Please click here to read more about the firm's amicus brief.

TAGS: US Supreme Court

May 3, 2016 Victory for Federal Employees in Long-Running Dispute

The firm achieved a victory for a group of US Commerce Department employees who charged the Department with racial discrimination.  The case started in 1995, when the employees filed an administrative class complaint alleging discrimination as evidenced by low performance ratings, continued denial of promotions ad awards and disparate treatment in job assignment , environment, recognition and training.  In 2015, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit remanded the case back  to the lower court, holding that the six-year statute of limitations for civil claims filed against the government does not apply to Title VII suits brought by federal  employees.

Please click here to read more.

TAGS: Employment

Recent Posts

Matters of Note




Connect With Us

Follow @jennerblockllp