|
HIGHLIGHTS FROM ACLU-CT’S 2007 LEGAL DOCKET
(as of August 31, 2007) PENDING CASESCooper v. United States Postal Service (U.S. District Court): This case challenges the U.S. Postal Service’s contract with a Connecticut corporation run by a church to offer traditional post office services to the public. The District Court recently ruled in our favor finding that the USPS had violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Motions are pending. Suzanne Wachsstock of Wiggin & Dana is cooperating counsel.
Read District Court ruling: Post Office Case Ruling (161K PDF) Corcoran v. German Social Society (Connecticut Superior Court): The Appellate Court ruled in our favor and reversed the trial court’s ruling that had upheld the denial of membership to a Mystic woman in a local social/dining club because of her gender. Other than its exclusion of women from membership, the club is open to the general public. The Lenora Lapidus and Emily Martin of the ACLU Women’s Rights Project are assisting as co-counsel, and Jon Orleans and Sarah Poston of Zeldes Needle & Cooper are cooperating counsel. Disclosure of customer calling information (Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control and U.S. District Court): In May 2006, the ACLU-CT filed a complaint with the DPUC requesting an investigation into AT&T and Verizon’s reported disclosure of private calling information of Connecticut customers to the National Security Agency (“NSA”) without court orders, warrants or subpoenas. The Attorney General’s office and the Office of Consumer Counsel intervened in support of the ACLU-CT. In April, the DPUC ruled in our favor and found that it will proceed with its investigation and rulemaking of the matter and that if it finds that the telephone companies did disclose such information, it will issue fines. In September 2006, the United States government filed suit in federal court seeking to stop the DPUC proceedings. The Court permitted the ACLU-CT to intervene and the case was consolidated in San Francisco with all the cases from around the country dealing with the phone companies’ disclosure of information to the NSA. Andrew Schatz, Seth Klein and Wayne Boulton of Schatz & Nobel, PC are cooperating counsel in both matters.
Read April 2007 Ruling ->DPUC & other states opinion 104K
Read CT DPUC Ruling -> "DPUC Ruling" 98K Read ACLU of Connecticut complaint -> DPUC Complaint 446K Flores v. City of Hartford (U.S. District Court): Defendant’s summary judgment motion was partially denied in this challenge brought on behalf of a man who was mistakenly stopped for a crime with which he was not involved and assaulted by the police. James DeDonato and Kellyanna Johnson of McCarter & English are cooperating counsel. Greens v. Garfield (U.S. District Court): In July 2006, the ACLU-CT filed a Complaint on behalf of several plaintiffs challenging portions of the state’s new campaign financing law. Under the law, minor party candidates will not be able to qualify for public financing of their campaigns, and lobbyists, state contractors and their immediate family members are completely barred from contributing to candidates for state legislative and executive office. Mark Lopez and Jonathan Miller of the ACLU are co-counsel.
Read ACLU-CT’s Complaint-> Campaign Finance Complaint 170K Kerrigan v. Connecticut Department of Public Health (Connecticut Appellate Court): Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders and the ACLU-CT have appealed the denial of claims brought on behalf of eight lesbian and gay couples seeking the right to marry under Connecticut law. Maureen Murphy of Murphy, Murphy & Nugent, LLC and Kenneth J. Bartschi and Karen Dowd of Horton, Shields & Knox, P.C. are cooperating counsel.
Read details-> http://www.glad.org/marriage/ Kildea v. Town of Canterbury (U.S. District Court): In June, we filed a case against the Town Selectmen of Canterbury who had shut down public comment at their meetings. A preliminary injunction hearing was held in July. David Cohen of Wofsey, Rosen, Kweskin Kuriansky, LLP is our cooperating counsel.
Read complaint -> Canterbury complaint 390K In re Nunez-Vargas (Immigration Court): We represent a man who is in deportation proceedings where we are challenging the legality of his arrest and interrogation at the Danbury Probation office by the Department of Homeland Security. MONITORING CASESOffice of Protection & Advocacy v. Choinski(U.S. District Court): The ACLU-CT is responsible for monitoring compliance with a 2005 consent order governing the treatment of mentally ill prisoners at Northern Correctional Institution (Connecticut’s “supermax” facility) and Garner Correctional, which houses many mentally ill inmates. The complaint, brought on behalf of the Office of Protection and Advocacy, claims that the stark and isolating conditions at the supermax prison exacerbate the condition of prisoners with mental illness, and that DOC mental health facilities and treatment procedures are inadequate. Ben Solnit of Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn, LLP is cooperating attorney and the ACLU National Prison Project is co-counsel. West v. Manson (U.S. District Court): The ACLU-CT is responsible for monitoring compliance with a 1988 consent order governing conditions at the women’s prison at Niantic. Most recently, we have focused on inadequate mental health care at the facility. Lynn Cochrane of Greater Hartford Legal Aid, Inc. is co-counsel and Andrew Gaillard of Day, Berry & Howard LLP is assisting as cooperating attorney. Sheff v. O’Neill (Connecticut Superior Court)
In 1996, the Supreme Court of Connecticut ruled that "the needy schoolchildren of Hartford have waited long enough," and urged the legislature and executive branches of the state government to put school integration "at the top of their respective agendas." We, together with other members of the Sheff team, continue to work to achieve that goal and provide children with access to quality, integrated educational opportunities. Fines and arrests for student swearing
We received a grant from the Human Rights Group of the ACLU to work on the issue of arrests of students in Connecticut schools for “mouthing off,” swearing and other speech, particularly from an international human rights perspective. We are partnering with the Human Rights Clinic at Yale Law School which conducted legal research as well as factual research using New Haven as a case study. We continue to investigate other areas of the state.
|
