Law Clinic in the News

Law Clinic in the News

Spring 2012

Environmental Law Clinic

Sackett v. EPA

The Environmental Law Clinic took part in a recent Supreme Court case: Sackett v. EPA. The Environmental Law Clinic helped with research and drafting for an amicus brief for the defense. The amicus brief, written primarily by lawyers from the National Resources Defense Counsel, sought to support EPA’s position with regard to the true facts of the case, and the potential environmental consequences of the Court’s decision. The case involved an Idaho couple who sought to fill in parts of their Priest Lake property which the EPA determined qualified as Clean Water act protected wetlands. Thus, the Sacketts were illegally filling in wetlands without the appropriate permit and were subject to fines. In court, the Sacketts challenged the EPAs determination of their property as wetlands and the EPAs ability to fine them for not following Clean Water Act requirements. The case was heard in the Supreme Court in January and a decision should be issued late March or early April.

Coeur d'Alene Levees

The Gonzaga University Environmental Law Clinic is currently representing Kootenai Environmental Alliance (“KEA”) in a National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) challenge against the United States Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”).  KEA is challenging an action by the Corps requiring the removal of all trees on the Rosenberry Levee located on Lake Coeur d’Alene. The Rosenberry Levee is home to over 500 mature trees that will be cut down as a result of the Corps’ new policy. On behalf of KEA, the Environmental Law Clinic is requesting that the Corps comply with NEPA and conduct an environmental study on the impacts of removing all vegetation from the Rosenberry Levee and levees nationwide.

Local Citizens, along with KEA, adamantly oppose the removal of the Rosenberry Levee trees. Reasons for opposition include the aesthetic value of the trees on the Levee and large costs incurred by the city of Coeur d’Alene in removing the trees.

Rick Eichstaedt, Environmental Clinic Supervisor, is the attorney representing KEA. Current interns Adam Gleason and Colin McHugh are assisting with the case. Previous interns Derek Leuzzi and Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin assisted on the case.

Protecting Local Land Use

Gonzaga University’s Environmental Law Clinic participated in a public hearing on behalf of Futurewise on January 26, 2012. John Norris, a student intern in the environmental clinic provided comments on behalf of Futurewise opposing Spokane County’s proposed plans to expand the Urban Growth Area. The Urban Growth Area in essence is used to encourage smart growth. Futurewise opposes the proposed plans for expansion because it alleges that the UGA is already too large as a result of over-estimated future population growth. In particular, Futurewise felt that the expansion would cost taxpayers and ratepayers because areas included in the proposed expansions would require essential services.

Clean Water Act Cases

Gonzaga’s Environmental Law clinic uses Clean Water Act citizen suits to ensure that pollution sources have proper discharge permits and actually comply with those permits. In some cases, Clean Water Act violators may not even be aware they are not in compliance. Occasionally, the Environmental Law clinic settle these type cases and can help violators understand what they were doing wrong, and how they can remain in compliance with the Clean Water Act in the future.

Business Law Clinic

CrossTek LLC was founded by an avid equestrian living in North Idaho as a company focused on equestrian safety. The company’s first product is a helmet invented by the founder to protect her horse from injury during transport in a trailer. Working with Innovate Washington, the company had secured a design patent on the helmet and written a strong business plan Students at the Business Law Clinic worked with CrossTek to craft an appropriate consumer warranty, to draw up terms for domestic and international sale, and to establish a written agreement between the company and a commissioned sales representative. Students also vetted the company's arrangements for design and manufacture of helmet components in order to assure that CrossTek's intellectual property rights were preserved. CrossTek is refining its product and expects to release it for sale this summer, in time for the London Olympics.

Family School of Music is a small Spokane business which offers instruction in a variety of musical instruments. The school was having difficulty retaining teachers. Students at the Business Law Clinic assisted the owners in preparing an employment agreement which provides incentives for retention, while assuring compliance with the state’s wage and hour laws. Students are now working to establish this husband-and-wife owned business as a limited liability company.

Water for Africa and Partnering for Progress are both non-profit organizations seeking to improve the living conditions of people in different regions of Africa. Students at the Business Law Clinic assisted the founders of Water for Africa in forming a Washington nonprofit corporation and obtaining recognition as a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Partnering for Progress was already established as a tax-exempt nonprofit when it approached the clinic. Students analyzed the organization’s insurance coverage and crafted a release to assist Partners for Progress in managing risks of liability arising from its operations. Both organizations are now actively working to carry out their charitable missions in Africa.

General Public Practice Clinic

The clinic currently represents a 34-year-old inmate who has been incarcerated since he was 16 serving a sentence of 28 years. He has an impeccable, infraction-free history while in prison. He has received a high school and college education while in prison. He has also become a skilled upholster who now manages the prison upholstery shop. Five years ago, pursuant to a clemency petitioned filed by the clinic on the client’s behalf, the Washington Board of Clemency and Paroles unanimously voted to recommend to Governor Gregoire that she grant clemency to the client based on compelling evidence of rehabilitation and minimal risk to the community. The governor has not yet acted on the clemency recommendation and the clinic is now preparing a new petition asking that the Governor act on the board’s recommendation before the Governor leaves office at the end of this year. The argument in favor of granting clemency – in addition to the client’s good behavior and rehabilitation – is that he is immediately employable and his release will save taxpayers in excess of $50,000 per year.

The Clinic represented the mother of a 14-year-old in a dispute over whether the youth should be required to spend time with his biological father, against the youth’s wishes.  Our theory of the case was that the youth had reached a rational conclusion, based on the father’s physical abuse of the youth’s step-sister (which had resulted in a criminal conviction for child abuse) and of the youth himself (which had not resulted in criminal charges) and various other inappropriate actions. Perhaps surprisingly, child abuse is not usually enough by itself to completely cut off a parent’s fundamental right to contact with his or her child. The judge denied our motion for an in-chambers interview of the youth. Instead, she relied heavily on the testimony of the youth’s counselor.

Students conducted the entire trial: opening statement, direct examinations, including examining an expert, introduction of exhibits, making and meeting objections, cross-examination, and closing argument. The experienced opposing attorney zealously represented his client. He used numerous objections and other actions that could have distracted the students, but they stayed calm and focused and did what needed to be done. In the end, the judge ruled entirely in our favor, ordering that the youth would not be forced to have contact with his father.

Indian Law Clinic

The Indian Law Clinic is not just about Indian law. Each semester the students receive training in Unemployment compensation law and undertake to represent claimants in administrative hearings before the Office of Administrative Hearings, the state agency that conducts hearings for the Employment Security Department as well as other state government departments.

Unemployment hearings are almost tailor-made for students. When a terminated worker is denied unemployment benefits, he or she can request a hearing. The cases come to us from a state wide organization (that helps workers with their hearings) in the form of an email with intake materials partially gathered. The hearing date may be just a week or two away. The students review the facts, examine the legal issues, consult with the supervisor, interview witnesses, conduct discovery, and prepare for the hearing in a very short time. The hearing itself takes place by phone conference with the client calling in from home, the boss from work and witnesses from wherever they are. Students do the direct examination, cross examine the witnesses for the employer and deliver a closing summation. We can expect a decision around a week after the hearing. All in all, the experience is stressful for the students in a good way, as the steps are the same for each case and the law is usually very clear. After two of these, the increase in confidence among the students is noticeable.

The clinic has helped a number of people receive unemployment benefits to keep their lives together following termination of their employment. One side benefit is we get to take a peek into some very different employment situations. Examples of case where we have been successful include an overworked cook’s aid who was fired for being crabby, a grocery employee who wanted to buy some tomatoes from the discard pile, a forklift operator who bent up some airplane parts (big parts), and a concierge who let a bridesmaid retrieve her dress from her friend’s apartment.

Federal Tax Clinic

The Federal Tax Clinic has been awarded $90,000 in grant funds for the 2012 calendar year: this is an increase over last year, and the grant funds have steadily increased from $60,000 in 2008. Our annual grant report covering 2011 is due on April 2, 2012.

During the tax season, the students make tax presentations as part of our English as a Second Language (ESL) outreach in classes at the Spokane Community Colleges, and at the Columbia Basin Community College in Tri-Cities.

We have plans to attend the Alaska Tax Court Calendar in Anchorage in June, and the Helena, Montana Tax Court Calendar in early fall. We always participate in the Spokane Tax Court Calendar that is every fall, and last year conducted a trial on November 1st, which the IRS is currently planning to settle for $0.00 liability for our client.

We are handling a variety of issues for our clients. We have some innocent spouse cases, penalty abatement cases, dependency and child credit disallowances, and several collection cases, including lien and levy issues, and offers in compromise, etc

We’ve added some new attorneys to our pro bono panel, and we always welcome volunteer and pro bono assistance. We have received fewer private donations due to the economy, but we are always very appreciative of any size donation to the tax clinic.

Thank you for your interest and support.

Top of Page

Fall 2011

The Federal Tax Clinic in University Legal Assistance assisted pro se taxpayers at the United States Tax Court Calendar in Spokane, Washington on October 31st, 2011.  Several students were able to negotiate settlements and advise taxpayers regarding their cases.  Additionally, two students conducted a trial with two witnesses against the IRS during the Tax Court session on November 1, 2011 before the Honorable Judge Stephen J. Swift.  The brief is due at the end of January and an opinion may be issued within six months or so.  Also, in September, two students traveled with the Federal Tax Clinic director to Helena, Montana and assisted pro se taxpayers at that United States Tax Court Calendar session.

Zombie Student Loans

The client took out several thousand dollars in student loans in the early 1990’s. Almost 20 years later, a private government contractor is collecting $40 per month from her Social Security retirement. The client obtained a discharge in bankruptcy court in 1997, which specifically included the student loans. Getting student loans discharged in bankruptcy is unusual so it was not surprising the collector denied that it was actually discharged. The client asked for and received an order from the bankruptcy court confirming that the student loan was discharged, and ordering the agency to stop collecting. This was not good enough for the collector, who demanded the client commence an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy. Unfortunately, the client was unrepresented and lost the case. The court dismissed her petition for failing to answer the collector’s discovery questions.

Into this morass stepped third-year student David Petersen. Through the summer, Petersen worked through the court file, learning a great deal about bankruptcy law. He has drafted a sheaf of documents to support a demand that the collector cease and desist. If that fails, the clinic is prepared to file a motion for contempt and damages in the original bankruptcy court in the Western District of Washington.

Divorce, Property Only
The clinic serves elders under a contract with Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington. From time to time, it handles a divorce for an elderly client.

In mid-May, David Melvin started his summer clinic with a trial date for late June. Last-minute settlement efforts fell through and the case went for a two-day trial before Superior Court Judge Tompkins. Melvin handled almost all aspects of the trial and post-trial activities under the supervision of Prof. Terrence V. Sawyer. The clinic obtained a fair and equitable result for our client that will provide her with financial stability for her retirement years.

This case in not over. Synova Edwards, a new third-year student will finalize the retirement funds transfers and wrap the case up along with her other work this fall.

More Litigation in the Sudanese Refugee Case

Last spring, clinicians secured the return of two children to the clinic's Sudanese client, in a case described earlier. Almost immediately, the alleged father brought a second action in Superior Court, seeking to be declared the de facto parent of the two children. Dennis Labbe and Arnold Jin, the students who worked to get the first result, drafted a motion and brief to dismiss the new case, even as they were finishing up school and beginning to study for the bar. Darryl Colman started the clinic in May and absorbed the convoluted history of the case from reading and meeting with Jin and Labbe. Colman, under the supervision of Prof. Terrence V. Sawyer, completed the brief and filed the motion, and then drafted and filed a reply brief. Finally, in late August, Colman argued the motion and obtained an order dismissing the second case.

This case is still not over, however. The other side also appealed the first decision. Colman will draft the brief in that case and, if the court permits argument, he may get to argue an appeal in the Washington Court of Appeals.

Top of Page