Brinks has been involved in many pro bono cases over the years. Some recent representative matters include:

Asylum/Immigration

• Our client, a Romanian immigrant who came to the U.S. with her husband and young son in 1998, experienced years of abuse from her husband before contacting the police in 2009. She obtained an order of protection against him and continued to report threats and vandalism. He was never arrested and later moved out of Illinois. In December 2010, Brinks submitted an application for a U-Visa before the U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services (USCIS), based on our client’s cooperation with law enforcement authorities concerning her husband's activities. In an unprecedented move, the USCIS requested more evidence of our client’s “helpfulness” to authorities, pointing out that she had never pressed any charges against her husband. Brinks and the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago were able to draft a response which led USCIS to grant the Romanian immigrant and her son U-Visa status, setting a precedent for others like her who may rely on police reports and orders of protection as evidence of cooperation with authorities in cases where there have been no arrests or convictions.
  
   
• An application for asylum recently was granted to an Ethiopian immigrant. Our client had been detained without arrest several times by Ethiopian police for such activities as arranging and directing student protests at Addis Ababa University over the issues of student rights and insufficient educational freedom, and writing newspaper articles about issues in Ethiopian elections. While detained he was beaten, interrogated, tortured and accused of being a member of the opposition party. He suffered a broken rib and contracted typhus. In July 2005, he fled to the U.S. after continuing to receive death threats from government security forces. Through the work of Brinks attorneys, the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services has granted him asylum, allowing him to receive work authorization and change his status to a lawful permanent resident.

 

• To avert deportation to Mexico, a client was applying for "cancellation of removal," a remedy available to an immigrant who has lived undocumented in the U.S. for more than 10 years and can establish that her deportation would result in "exceptional and extremely unusual hardship" to her U.S. citizen children. Brinks investigated the client's circumstances and developed the persuasive fact that the client's 12-year-old daughter had a learning disability and had been receiving special services since kindergarten. The family would never receive the services she needed if she returned to Mexico and this was central to the "hardship" requirement in the case. At the hearing, the immigration judge recognized the significant accomplishments of the client and her children here in the U.S., together with the hardship they would suffer if she and her children returned to Mexico, and therefore granted the case.

 

• An asylum applicant from Cameroon, who was a member of the minority Anglophone political party of that African nation, was a nonviolent protester against oppressive Francophone rule. According to testimony that our attorneys elicited during our client’s asylum hearings, he wrote an article reporting on the oppressive activities of the Francophone rulers in violently dispersing peaceful Anglophone demonstrations, among other things. Our client testified that following the publication of his article, he was promptly jailed in squalid conditions and tortured numerous times, including being cut with broken shards of glass and whipped and beaten unconscious. In an act of desperation, our client fled to the United States, where he sought political asylum. Our attorneys represented him at numerous hearings over the course of two years, and after an Order of the Immigration Judge granting asylum to our client, he now resides lawfully in the United States.

Education 

• Brinks helped a Chicago area 7th grader obtain special education resources. Despite his mother's persistent efforts, the student refused to leave his home to attend school and had missed nearly half the school year. When his school district threatened to report him truant, a Brinks attorney met with school officials, who then agreed to perform a case study evaluation. The school district agreed to a diagnostic placement at an alternative school that had greater resources and a much smaller student body. He thrived in his new environment and had near-perfect attendance for the last semester. Upon completing the evaluation, the school district agreed that the student required special education resources and recommended that he continue attending the alternative school in a summer school program and at the beginning of 8th grade. Following the first quarter of 8th grade, it is anticipated that he may transition into a regular school environment, one class at a time. 

 

• A 7th grade student from Chicago suffered from certain learning disabilities that required significant services. When Chicago Public Schools (CPS) drastically reduced her special education services, her grades suffered accordingly. Attorneys from Brinks represented the parents of this child before CPS at an annual meeting to evaluate the child's special education program. At the meeting, Brinks attorneys convinced CPS to nearly double the child's special education services time for the upcoming school year, and also set the groundwork for a follow-up meeting to assess whether additional special education services would be necessary.

Eviction

• Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione successfully defended a political refugee from Sierra Leone in an eviction matter after he reported problems with his rental unit to the city. Our client had moved his family into an apartment with numerous problems, including broken locks, improper plumbing and an inoperative kitchen stove. After he informed the landlord and then city inspectors about the poor conditions of the apartment, the landlord filed an eviction suit. Brinks attorneys worked with the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago to successfully negotiate a settlement with the landlord and the client was also given sufficient time to relocate.
  
   
• After five years in her apartment, a Chicago woman was confronted with a new landlord who decided that he wanted her out, along with her young son, daughter and nephew, within 30 days. The woman needed time to obtain papers from the Chicago Housing Authority so that she could continue to receive rental assistance vouchers, as well as find a new place to live. When she was not able to move out within the time demanded by the landlord’s notice, he filed an eviction case against her. Brinks represented her in appearances before the judge and provided her with key advice to pay rent in response to a five-day notice that the landlord mistakenly served upon the client after the case commenced. Because the client paid her overdue rent in response to this notice, the Brinks team had created a basis to move to dismiss the case. Recognizing the merit in the Brinks team’s position, the landlord’s attorney voluntarily dismissed the case, which gave the client more time to find a suitable apartment for her family.

 

• Brinks represented an honorably discharged veteran receiving disability compensation for a severe medical condition in a pro bono eviction case. Our client, who paid her rent every month, was given an eviction notice by new management because her current month's rent was a few days overdue. The previous management had let her pay a few days after the official due date every month. During the 5-day period provided by law to belatedly pay her rent, she tendered her rent money. The landlord refused to accept the rent, however, and filed the eviction case. Our attorneys successfully saw the case dismissed by the landlord and our client continues to live in the same apartment, and she and the new management appear to have resolved their differences. 

 

• A 64-year-old woman living on social security payments and food stamps fell behind on her December rent, and her landlord, interested in selling the dilapidated building, seized on the opportunity by attempting to evict her by the end of December to expedite the sale of the building. The client was improperly served with an eviction notice by the landlord, and Brinks attorneys negotiated the terms of an Agreed Order in Cook County Municipal Court that allowed our client time to move into a new residence over the holidays, waived all of the client’s back rent, and dismissed the case with prejudice.

 

• Our pro bono clients’ landlord couldn’t decide whether the monthly rent on their apartment was $475 or $625. After attempting to raise the rent and then agreeing not to raise it several times, the landlord served our clients with a five-day notice. He then filed a claim for possession and back rent of $300, with ongoing use and occupancy at $625 per month. Our attorneys and summer associates, with the assistance of staff members fluent in Spanish, filed a Motion to Dismiss that convinced opposing counsel of the need to settle the case. The Agreed Order (1) dismissed the case; (2) waived all of the landlord’s claims for unpaid rent and any future claims he might have in connection with the apartment; and (3) preserved our clients’ claims for overpayment on utility services.

 

• A client and her two young sons were living in an apartment with rodents that chewed holes in the drywall and left behind droppings, exposed wiring over the shower, a collapsing ceiling and flooding when it rained. After several complaints about the conditions, our client withheld rent until these problems were corrected, as promised in the rental agreement. The landlord then initiated an eviction proceeding that included a count to recover back rent. Following filing of a Motion to Dismiss, our attorneys and summer associates were able to get the case dismissed, and negotiated a settlement that waived all back rent and allowed the client and her family time to move to better living conditions.

 

• A single mother of two young children trying to make ends meet was living in a dilapidated apartment on the South Side of Chicago. Unfortunately, the client lost her job and could not pay her rent. Her landlord improperly served her with an eviction notice. After one month of negotiations, a Brinks attorney negotiated an Agreed Order to dismiss the case with prejudice and have the landlord waive all back rent.

Family/Domestic 

• A pro bono client was faced with the return of a former husband who was recently released from prison. The client previously had experienced domestic or family violence involving this former husband. A Brinks attorney represented the client at a hearing for an Order of Protection. Through evidence presented at the hearing, the attorney established that the former husband represented a credible threat to the safety of the client or a member of the client’s household. As a result, an Order of Protection of almost 5 years in duration was obtained on behalf of the client and her family.

Intellectual Property 

• A defendant in a trademark infringement matter involving performing clowns in the Chicagoland area had started her small business of providing clown services to assist her off of welfare. The plaintiff was a performing clown who alleged trademark infringement as a primary count of his complaint. Brinks attorneys initially successfully defended against a motion for a temporary restraining order. Following full discovery (including depositions of the parties and several third parties), and based on a summary judgment motion filed by Brinks, Judge Arnold of the Circuit Court, Chancery Division, ruled in our pro bono client’s favor and dismissed the plaintiff’s Lanham Act trademark count. The remaining counts of the complaint were promptly settled on terms very favorable to our client.

 

• A nonprofit organization dedicated to providing children’s programming to public access television stations learned that a former volunteer on the television show (and former member of the client’s Board of Directors) had registered the client’s common law trademark as an Internet domain and was placing his own content on Web pages associated with this domain. Brinks took on this client and fired an opening salvo in what conceivably could have resulted in a contested ICANN proceeding (an Internet domain name dispute resolution mechanism established by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers).  After corresponding with the adverse party, Brinks attorneys received an initial settlement offer that yielded an immediate transfer of the domain name to the client for a nominal sum, the approximate equivalent of what the client would have paid to register the domain name in the first place.

Veterans Affairs 

• A World War II veteran’s widow was denied her claim for compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). Her case was on appeal pro se to the Federal Circuit. Brinks attorneys took the case on behalf of Paralyzed Veterans of America. The widow’s husband had served on active duty during World War II. He continued working for the Army as a civilian until 1968 when he was forced to retire due to his service-connected health conditions, which contributed to his death in 1992. However, the DVA rejected the widow’s claim that her husband was not properly compensated for his service and injury. Brinks attorneys reviewed the 50-year record and prepared the Federal Circuit briefs. Prior to the closing of briefing, the DVA offered to settle. The widow received the entire relief requested spanning over 20 years of past damages and going forward.Lanham Act trademark count. 
  
   
• A team of Brinks attorneys helped file an appeal for a U.S. Air Force veteran who had been denied benefits by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). The case arose when our client sought disability benefits for diabetes from the VA. The VA Claims department, the Board of Veteran Appeals and the U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals rejected the client’s request on the basis that the client had not shown that his disability arose during his time of service. Our attorneys argued that the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims erred by affirming a decision disregarding independent medical evidence because the physician did not review the client’s Air Force medical records. In a rare decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the case back to the Board of Veteran Appeals.