You are here

Available Cases

This is a Complaint purportedly seeking Declaratory and Injunctive Relief under the Administrative Procedures Act to allegedly “resolve conflicting agency actions by the Department of Education (DOE) and the Social Security Administration (SSA).” (ECF No. 1 at 1). According to Plaintiff, although the “DOE determined that Plaintiff’s disability warranted permanent exclusion from higher education,” SSA denied Plaintiff social security benefits. Id. at 2.

This case is at a very early stage, and volunteer representation would entail representing Plaintiff during all pretrial proceedings, including motions for summary judgment, and at trial, if necessary. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

This case involves a pump-and-dump scheme with crypto assets perpetrated by the Defendants. As part of the alleged pump-and-dump, the Defendants made misrepresentations and omissions to investors. Defendant Troy Hogg is pro se and seeks pro bono representation. Trial is scheduled for July 28, 2025. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

Defendant Peter Salles, proceeding pro se, is seeking legal representation in connection with a lawsuit filed against him, American Airlines, and several American Airlines employees. Plaintiffs, Anthony Williams and Katsiaryna Shasholka, filed this action alleging racial discrimination against the airline and other claims stemming from events that occurred during and immediately following an American Airlines flight. Salles, a fellow passenger on the flight, faces claims of false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Specifically, Plaintiffs assert that Salles falsely accused Williams of human trafficking. Salles denies the allegations and asserts he acted in good faith to alert the airline to his concern for the welfare of a fellow passenger.

This case is still in the early stages of litigation. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

The Complaint alleges that Plaintiffs are Venezuelan citizens and activists seeking redress from Defendants’ coordinated campaign of defamation, intimidation, invasion of privacy, designed to interfere with Plaintiffs’ legal actions and activist activities. As a result of this alleged conduct, Plaintiffs assert the following claims: RICO §1962 (Count I), civil conspiracy (Count II) defamation (Count III), public disclosure of private facts (Count IV), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count V), negligence (Count VI), violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985(2) and 1985(3) (Count VII), violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1986 (Count VIII), aiding and abetting (Count IX), and violation of the Law of Nations and the Alien Tort Statute (Count X).

This case is at an early stage, and volunteer representation would entail representing Plaintiff during all pretrial proceedings, including discovery, mediation, and at trial, if necessary. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

The Plaintiff, Maksims Kvasnins, has brought an action against Defendants Eagle Star Films, Inc., Karmel Bortoleti, and Andre Alves for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud in the inducement, and violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The Plaintiff alleges that these Defendants deceived him into investing nearly $150,000 into an ongoing film project and then failed to repay him (plus interest) as required by the parties’ financing agreement. All three Defendants are unrepresented and are searching for volunteer counsel. This case is in its early stages, as the Court has extended the time for the Defendants to respond to the Plaintiff’s Complaint. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

Plaintiff worked for Defendant Facebook/Meta as a contractor. The Complaint alleges Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff (1) in violation of Title VII on the basis of Plaintiff’s race, sex, and age; (2) in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; and (3) for engaging in “protected activity” – whistleblowing criminal wrongdoing. Plaintiff alleges that as a result of Defendant’s retaliation smear campaign, she endured financial loss, material loss, bodily injury, stress, mental anguish, and defamation. Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant, as well as damages in an amount to be determined.

This case is at a very early stage, and volunteer representation would entail representing Defendant during all pretrial proceedings, including discovery, mediation, and at trial, if necessary. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

Plaintiff Marie Dorival seeks representation in connection with a lawsuit against her employer Cole, Scott & Kissane and one of its lawyers Andrea Gundersen, alleging race-based discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

Plaintiff Gary Collins seeks representation in connection with a lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. alleging breach of contract in relation to purported unauthorized bank transfers or transactions. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

Pro Se Plaintiff Charles Roberson brings claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various Florida police officers for alleged mistreatment and brutality occurring during a 2019 hospital visit for an unrelated accident. Plaintiff has indicated his is unable to afford counsel. This case is in early stages. Volunteer representation would entail representing Plaintiff during all pretrial proceedings, including discovery, mediation, and at trial, if necessary. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

The Plaintiff has sued two City of Coral Gables police officers. He alleges that, when he was arrested, one of the officers excessively tased him. He also alleges that both officers lied to their supervisors about his conduct during the arrest, resulting in his prosecution for two charges of aggravated battery and two charges of attempted murder—charges that were eventually dropped. The Court has allowed three claims to proceed: a § 1983 excessive-force claim against the officer who tased the Plaintiff, a state-law battery claim arising out of the same conduct, and a state-law malicious prosecution claim against both officers for the alleged false charges. The Court expects the case to survive summary judgment and soon proceed to trial. If interested, please email FLSD_ProBono@flsd.uscourts.gov

Pages