You are here

Available Cases

Plaintiff filed claims against My Personal Business Coach LLC and Sharyn Mitchell for claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendant Sharyn Mitchell has requested the assistance of a volunteer attorney in her defense. This case is still in the early stages of discovery.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Pro se Plaintiff, Bernardo Valdes, filed this action seeking review of an unfavorable decision on his disability insurance benefits claim by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. The Complaint was filed September 19, 2017, and Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Defendant has not yet filed a response to the Complaint.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Mr. Lucas is a pro se prisoner who has filed claims alleging violation of his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Specifically, Mr. Lucas alleges that during the execution of an arrest warrant for probation violation, defendant officers used excessive force when they punched and kicked Mr. Lucas after he had been handcuffed. Mr. Lucas alleges that as a result he has submitted numerous sick call requests for migraines and shoulder and back pain, and has been diagnosed with osteo arthritis. This case is in the initial pleading stage and has not yet been set for trial.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Pro se Plaintiff brings civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The complaint was recently filed and service has yet to be effectuated.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Pro se Defendant is being sued for willful copyright infringement in violation of 17 U.S.C. 101, et seq. The Court denied Defendant's motions to dismiss and to strike. Defendant's answer is due on or before September 13, 2017.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Plaintiff has appealed the Social Security Administration's decision denying her application for Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

A former University of Miami student brings various claims against the University of Miami, a former professor, a former student, and a university administrator over allegations of sexual misconduct. The former student has requested counsel to represent her in this case.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Pro se Plaintiff, Allen Bruce Gottlieb, filed this action to seek relief based on FRCP 60(d)(1), that is to obtain relief from a judgment by order or independent action. The judgment from which Plaintiff seeks relief is a EDNY order granting summary judgment in favor of the SEC, which Plaintiff alleges was obtained by fraud.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Three pro se Defendants have requested counsel to represent them in the jury trial on the Plaintiffs' claims for violations of the FLSA and for negligence. The trial is set to commence on or about July 10, 2017, with a calendar call on July 5, 2017. The Plaintiffs' claims arise from Defendants' alleged failure to pay the Plaintiffs' wages in the weeks leading up to mass layoffs (on October 30, 2015) upon the failure of the entity known as Dade Medical College. On March 6, 2017, the Court granted in part and denied in part the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment, finding that one of the three Defendants can be considered the Plaintiffs' “employer” for purposes of the FLSA.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Plaintiff alleges that he injured his arm and shoulder while incarcerated, and had surgery that included placing hardware into his arm. Plaintiff further alleges that, after the surgery, he had nerve pain, muscle atrophy, and loss of range of motion. According to Plaintiff, the doctor who performed the surgery told Plaintiff that he would require additional surgery to remove the hardware, and to correct the physical impairment. Plaintiff alleges, however, that while he was at Taylor Correctional Institution, Defendants Balin and Smith ignored recommendations from three (3) other medical personnel that Plaintiff be seen by an orthopedist and receive continued physical therapy. And Plaintiff alleges that he suffered worsening of his condition and injury as a result. The Court has thus concluded that the case should proceed against Defendants Balin and Smith in their individual capacities, on Eighth Amendment theories of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov.

Pages