|
Washington State Foreclosure Project
Washington State Bar Association creates new foreclosure defense project.
|
|
Legal Aid Services of Oregon v. LSC court decision
April 7, 2008 decision in LASO v. LSC
|
|
Appendix B
Appendix of a summary of the comments from respondents to the fall 2006 Recruitment and Retention Committee Survey
|
|
Appendix A
Appendix with graphic representation of data from all respondents to the fall 2006 Recruitment and Retention Committee Survey
|
|
State Justice Communities: Where Do We Go From Here?
Don Saunders article from the Winter 2004-2005 issue of Cornerstone Magazine is an important resource in our ongoing discussion of state justice communities.
|
|
State Justice Communities: Where Do We Go From Here?
For the last 10 years, the civil legal aid community and its supporters have been heavily engaged in both the process and substance of developing a new national vision of how legal assistance for poor people will be delivered in this country. As always within the equal justice community, this endeavor has spun off a number of catch phrases and acronyms: CISS (Comprehensive, Integrated Statewide Systems), State Planning, �stakeholders�, State Justice Communities, SPAN (State Planning Assistance Network), DSPB (Designated State Planning Body), Access to Justice Commissions and, of course, �reconfiguration�.
This document discusses the history and the future of State Justice Communities
|
|
The Consequences of Criminal Proceedings in New York State: A Guide for Criminal Defense Attorneys and Other Advocates for Persons with Criminal Records
This Guide was developed in conjunction with an intensive training offered by the Civil Action Project at The Bronx Defenders. It is a comprehensive survey of the invisible punishments resulting from criminal proceedings in New York State, and it offers practical advice and strategies for mitigating these "collateral" consequences. It focuses in particular on the role of defenders.
|
|
Annual Conference Takes a Look Back, a Look Ahead for Civil Legal Aid
Don Saunders article from the Winter 2003-2004 issue of Cornerstone magazine sumarizing and introducing the Look Back, Look Ahead feature.
|
|
Reentry—the Tie That Binds Legal Aid Attorneys and Public Defenders
What does the term “reentry ” mean? Whose responsibility is it to serve these clients —civil legal aid attorneys or public defenders? Moreover, why should civil legal aid attorneys and public defenders be concerned about the hundreds of thousands of ex-offenders returning to their communities each year?
This article was first published in Clearinghouse Review, 37 Clearinghouse Rev. 328(Sept.-Oct. 2003)
|
|
Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons
Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons
|
|
Aggressive Advocacy in Today's Program Environment
Remarks of Alan Houseman, Executive Director of the Center for Law and Social Policy, at the NLADA Litigation and Advocacy Directors Conference in Snowbird, Utah, June 23, 2002.
|
|
Comments on the LSC Regulations Review Task Force Report
In response to the September 13, 2001 notice in the Federal Register, the National Legal Aid and Defender Association (NLADA) Civil Policy Group, through its Committee on Restrictions and Regulations (the Committee) is pleased to submit these comments to the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) regarding the Final Report of the Regulations Review Task Force (Report).
|
|
9th Circuit En Banc Decision - Washington Legal Foundation vs. Legal Foundation of Washington
In a 7-4 decision, in the case of WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION vs. LEGAL FOUNDATION OF WASHINGTON, the Ninth Circuit has affirmed the district court, saying "there has been no taking of property without
just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment."
The Court remanded the first amendment claim to the district court.
|
|
May 18, 2001 memo to LSC re Suggested Areas of Revision for Parts 1611 and 1626
MEMORANDUM
TO: LSC Regulations Review Task Force
FROM: Restrictions and Regulations Committee,
NLADA Civil Policy Group
DATE: May 18, 2001
RE: Suggested areas of revision for Parts 1611 and 1626
This memorandum is submitted to the LSC Regulations Review Task Force by the NLADA Civil Policy Group's Restrictions and Regulations Committee. The Committee has reviewed the current versions of Parts 1611 (Eligibility) and 1626 (Aliens) as well as the 1995 proposed revisions to Part 1611, and has identified numerous areas of both rules that we believe are in need of revision. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the LSC Task Force with the Committee's views of those issues that should be addressed in the rulemaking process that is now underway at LSC. Because it is very early in the process, we have not generally proposed specific language to be incorporated into the revisions, other than those provisions that are included in LSC's 1995 proposed revisions to Part 1611. However, the Committee does intend to consider specific recommended revisions and we are available to work with the LSC staff to develop proposed language at an appropriate time in the future.
|
|
March 8, 2000 memo to LSC President John McKay re Issues for LSC Regulatory Reform
MEMORANDUM
TO: John McKay
FROM: Linda Perle and Alan Houseman
DATE: March 8, 2000
RE: Issues for LSC Regulatory Reform
We understand that the Legal Services Corporation is considering whether to revisit issues raised by the LSC regulations, particularly with respect to the administrative burdens that compliance with those regulations imposes on recipients. This memo attempts to outline some of the regulatory issues that we believe the Corporation should consider as it embarks on any such effort, and to state our views about which issues merit significant attention.
|
|
Jan. 2001 Comments on the Proposed LSC Regulatory Review (1611 & 1636)
Submitted by the Committee on Restrictions and Regulations of the Civil Policy Group
National Legal Aid & Defender Association
January 10, 2001
These comments are submitted to the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) by the Committee on Restrictions and Regulations, on behalf of the National Legal Aid & Defender Association�s Civil Policy Group in response to LSC�s request for public comment that were published in the Federal Register on November 24, 2000, (65 FR 70540), requesting input into a proposed review by the LSC Board of the LSC regulatory scheme.
|
|
Petition for Rehearing in October 2001 5th Circuit IOLTA Decision
Petition for Rehearing in October 2001 5th Circuit IOLTA Decision
|
|
Mental Health Litigation Unit
Mental Health Litigation Unit of the Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services provides counsel for indigent persons in all mental health proceedings (criminal & civil) and in "sexually dangerous person" commitment proceedings.
|
|
LSC Program Letter 2001-03
LSC Program Letter 2001-03
|
|
LSC vs. Velazquez, U.S. Supreme Court Opinion
Opinion of U.S. Supreme Court in LSC vs. Velazquez
|
