Cases / Briefs

Doe v. University of the Sciences

This appeal arose out of a male student’s Title IX claim that the University of the Sciences had unfairly disciplined him for sexually assaulting classmates. John Doe claimed that the University’s investigatory procedures violated state law and that the University was motivated by anti-male bias….

Brown v. State of Arizona

This is an appeal concerning the scope of schools’ responsibilities to address gender violence that occurs between students off campus. Mackenzie Brown, a student at the University of Arizona, was viciously abused by her classmate Orlando Bradford, a football player. The violence was preventable: By…

General Motors LLC v. Buchanan

Public Justice recently filed an amicus brief in General Motors LLC v. Buchanan before the Georgia Supreme Court on the question of whether the court should adopt an “apex doctrine,” which places a heightened burden on a party who seeks to depose any high-ranking corporate…

Doe v. Crestwood School District

This was an administrative complaint brought by a parent of Child Doe, a gender non-conforming student. Child Doe, an elementary school student in Crestwood School District, was subjected to unremedied harassment and discriminatory discipline on the basis of their gender identity and expression. Child Doe’s…

Thompson v. Polaris, Inc.

Public Justice is pleased to report an amicus victory in Thompson v. Polaris Inc., a Minnesota Supreme Court case decided in December 2021. Polaris, a leading manufacturer of outdoor powersports vehicles, attempted to conceal a safety audit report—relevant evidence in the case—by claiming attorney-client privilege….

Morgan v. Sundance, Inc.

Public Justice is co-counsel in Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., an overtime and wage theft case on behalf of former Taco Bell employee Robyn Morgan against Sundance Inc., a company that owns more than 150 Taco Bell franchises throughout the country. Co-Director of the Access to Justice...

Glover v. Bausch & Lomb

This appeal raises questions regarding the scope of federal preemption of state tort law claims based on injuries caused by a medical device—an issue at the core of our Access to Justice work. The question is whether the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act expressly or…

Skip to content