You are here

Available Cases

On December 10, 2021, Plaintiff, Yuri Contreras, filed his Complaint against the Florida Department of Corrections, Centurion of Florida, and several employees of the Dade Correctional Institution: five correctional officers, the Warden, and the Inspector General.  Plaintiff alleges Defendants failed to protect him from sexual assault by a fellow inmate, retaliated against him for filing a complaint regarding his sexual assault, and effectuated a grievance procedure that discriminated against him on account of his disability.  Among Plaintiffs claims, he alleges correctional officers labelled him a snitch and other derogatory designations to incite violence from other inmates against Plaintiff.  These officers also allegedly seized and destroyed documents pertaining to Plaintiffs grievances.  Defendants conduct allegedly denied Plaintiff due process and equal protection under the law, in addition to violating the Eighth Amendment and Title II of the Americans with Disability Act.

Plaintiff requests injunctive relief and seeks compensatory and actual damages.  Plaintiff has until February 1, 2022 to refile his Complaint.  Plaintiff states he suffers from intellectual disabilities and only speaks Spanish. If interested, please email

Plaintiff filed suit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security alleging disability discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation. This is Plaintiff's third attempt to file suit before the Court.  Plaintiff has revised his Complaint each time in an effort to satisfy pleading requirements.  Plaintiff's most recent Complaint claims he was employed by the Defendant as a Transportation Security Officer at Palm Beach International Airport in West Palm Beach, Florida.  Plaintiff alleges he notified his supervisors of his disability, specifically ADHD, and requested an accommodation after he experienced adverse symptoms when utilizing a new procedural technique.  Plaintiff claims he made several requests for accommodation and notified several supervisors of the issue.  Plaintiff maintains he was not accommodated and rather was given a "Letter of Counseling." Plaintiff claims several members of management intentionally humiliated him when he was attempting to comply with the new policy, and as a result, Plaintiff alleges he was working in hostile work environment.  Plaintiff maintains that he was constructively terminated as a result of his disability and request for an accommodation. 

Plaintiff's Complaint is not lacking in factual allegations; however, the Complaint is oddly drafted, repetitive, and confusing.  Plaintiff paid the filing fee in full and is in the process of attempting to serve Defendant.  However, Defendant has not been served with process to date.  Plaintiff must serve Defendant by January 8, 2020. If interested, please email

Plaintiff brings an FLSA action against pro se Defendant Carlos Garcia alleging overtime wage violations.  Clerks Default was entered against Mr. Garcia on October 7, 2021.  Mr. Garcia is seeking a volunteer lawyer to represent him in this matter.  The Jury Trial is set to commence on January 31, 2022. If interested, please email

Plaintiff, Michael Grant, is a disabled attorney. Plaintiff is suing Defendant, Noel Stephen, the elected sheriff of Okeechobee County, and others for Retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act and various state law intentional torts. If interested, please email

Pro se Plaintiff, an incarcerated felon, filed a civil rights complaint asserting a claim for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. Plaintiff alleges that his treating physicians failed to properly care for an infected toe, which was later amputated. He also alleges that his physicians subsequently failed to properly treat his toes following an accident in which he broke three toes. Both remaining defendants have answered the complaint. Volunteer representation would entail representing Plaintiff during all pretrial proceedings, including discovery, mediation, and at trial, if necessary. If interested, please email

This is RICO Act case brought by a Florida limited liability company which owned various properties and the married couple the owns the LLC against various banks and individuals associated with those banks. The Plaintiffs alleges that the Defendants induced the Plaintiffs to take out a line of credit from Oakes Capital by representing that a line of credit would allow Plaintiffs to purchase properties without having to apply for a commercial mortgage, that Oakes Capital could provide a line of credit a very small interest rate, that the line of credit would have no impact on the Plaintiffs credit, and that Oakes Capital was a major financial institution that maintained billions of dollars in assets. The Plaintiffs contend that those were lies and Defendants never used any of their own money to fund the credit line and, instead, used the properties owned by the LLC as their own, securing loans and mortgages from banks by leveraging the properties. One of the individual Defendants, Joanna Galy, who is described as a manager and partner at Oakes Capital, is now seeking representation through the Volunteer attorney Program. The complaint alleges Galy helped advance, further, execute, conceal, conduct, participate in or carryout the scheme. If interested, please email

Plaintiff, a pretrial detainee, claims his jailor—a Defendant in this action—slammed him “face first” against the wall, among other physical acts and verbal threats.  This Defendant is being sued for his alleged excessive force.  Another Defendant, who is also a jailor, allegedly observed these events and is, therefore, sued for his failure to intervene.  As injuries, Plaintiff says he suffered “swelling and redness,” “severe pain” in his head and neck and endures repeated “nightmares” and continued “mental stress” due to the incident. Both Defendants recently filed their answers and affirmative defenses.  Plaintiff is still in custody.  Presently, Plaintiff requires assistance with the discovery process, the preparation of any dispositive motions or challenges to such motions, and (possibly) trial representation if this case is not resolved via a dispositive motion or settlement. If interested, please email

Plaintiff is a pro se prisoner bringing a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against an officer for unlawful use of force.  The district court has denied the officer’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity.  This case is trial ready.  If interested, please email

This civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was screened and allowed to proceed on Plaintiffs First Amendment retaliation claim and punitive damages claim against Defendant Johnson who allegedly threw away Plaintiffs personal property and legal materials after he successfully beat misdemeanor criminal charges filed by Defendant.  Plaintiff has been granted pauper status and service has been ordered on Defendant.  This case is at a very 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

Plaintiff brings various claims against Defendant Windy Hill Foliage Incorporated for numerous violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, including disparate treatment, failure to accommodate, and reprisal. Plaintiff suffers from ADHD and alleges that Defendant Windy Hill Foliage Incorporated violated the ADA by conducting an over-the-phone disability screening on Plaintiff for the position of Commercial Truck Driver without his knowledge or consent, and by denying him employment based on his medical condition. Plaintiff is requesting compensatory damages, and front and back pay. If interested, please email