GOOD CAUSE

GOOD CAUSE

2008 PRO BONO ANNUAL REPORT

2008 Pro Bono Annual Report 1

Pro bono and public service work is an integral part of Goodwin Procter. Our

attorneys and paralegals are provided year-round opportunities to participate in

the fi rm’s Pro Bono Program, which benefi ts hundreds of individuals and

organizations in the United States and abroad.

Late in 2008, Goodwin Procter formally announced the fi rm’s fi rst international offi ces

in London and Hong Kong. A presence in the United Kingdom and Asia has been a key

element of our strategic growth plan, and we look forward to exploring pro bono

opportunities in these locales through NGOs and legal services organizations.

In the United States, our pro bono work continues 365 days a year. On any given day, our attorneys are working on a

wide variety of pro bono matters, so we have made this year’s report a month-by-month retrospective – a “year in the

life” of pro bono at Goodwin Procter. For each month of the past year, we highlight a particular pro bono client or

project. These 12 profi les serve as a fi ne sampling of the nearly 500 pro bono matters we handled in 2008.

My gratitude, and admiration, go out to our staff, whose passion and energy help drive our Pro Bono Program.

I must also acknowledge our pro bono clients. It is a privilege to work with – and be enriched by – each of you on a

daily basis.

Regina M. Pisa

Chairman and Managing Partner

Foreword

2

A successful law fi rm pro bono program requires us to apply the same enthusiasm,

dedication and creativity that we have in our commercial practice to the

problems of clients we represent at no charge. In the pages of this report, you

will read many examples of lawyers who did just that. Whether providing direct legal

services to those who cannot afford them, or working with nonprofi t organizations that

seek to improve the quality of life for the poor and under served, Goodwin Procter

attorneys have devoted themselves to providing high-quality service to pro bono clients.

2008 Pro Bono Report

We have highlighted 12 representative matters that challenged our lawyers in 2008 across various offi ces and practice

groups. To describe just a few, we helped Holocaust survivors apply for reparations from the German government,

helped guarantee the right to vote by participating in a national Election Protection Program and represented litigants

on a wide range of issues before the U.S. Supreme Court and before trial courts and administrative agencies. Our

business lawyers advised nonprofi t organizations that lend money and provide training to help people work their way

out of poverty, and that supply meals to underprivileged school children. Through passion and commitment, we strive

to fulfi ll the promise of “equal justice under law” and make a difference in our communities and around the world.

Pro Bono 2008 Statistics

Pro bono at Goodwin Procter is a voluntary practice, one that is enthusiastically supported and encouraged at all

levels. Over 70% of our attorneys participated in our Pro Bono Program in 2008, and the involvement spanned all

practice areas, levels of experience and geographic locations. This past year – over the course of more than 65,750

Introductionby Thomas Mikula


hours – our attorneys worked on 493 matters, 162 of which were new. Our lawyers have continued to reach out and

dedicate an average of over 4.6% of their billable time to pro bono work.

Thomas Mikula is a Products Liability partner in Goodwin Procter’s Washington, D.C. offi ce. He served as co-chair of the

fi rm’s Pro Bono Program from 2005 through 2008.

Number of...

Attorneys Participating in Pro Bono 579

Legal Assistants Participating in Pro Bono 91

Summer Associates Participating in Pro Bono 123

Non-Legal Staff Supporting Pro Bono 56

Active Cases 493

New Pro Bono Matters Opened 162

Attorneys Who Billed Greater Than 50 Pro Bono Hours 251

Informational Sessions and Training 39Programs (internal and external)

Pro Bono Areas of Concentration*

*by number of matters

4

Photos owned by The Akshaya Patra Foundation.

4


The Akshaya Patra Foundation is the world’s largest NGO-run mid-day meal program for schoolchildren.

Akshaya Patra, which means “never ending bowl” in Sanskrit, currently feeds over one million underprivi-

leged children in government-run schools across India daily. By incorporating innovative technology, scaled

engineering and high-level management, the organization has built a cost-effective program that tackles hunger and

improves education by increasing school attendance. The program, which is being studied for replication in other

countries, serves nutritious meals at a cost of $28 per year per child, and one of its innovations is a chapatti (bread)

machine that makes 10,000 chapattis an hour.

In January 2008, we helped the organization revamp its U.S. board of directors and appoint its new board chair.

Also in January, as Akshaya Patra began forming chapters throughout the United States, Goodwin Procter advised on

compliance with charitable solicitation regulatory and fi ling requirements, as well as various contractual relationships

with local service providers.

Goodwin Procter’s pro bono work has also gone beyond the realm of legal work. In 2007, Akshaya Patra held its

fi rst ever walk-a-thon fundraiser in Boston, Massachusetts. Our attorneys helped from the initial steps of planning

the route and obtaining the requisite permits to consulting on potential liability issues; many even participated in

the event. In early 2008, we helped Akshaya Patra plan its second walk-a-thon, now an annual fundraiser for

the organization.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.foodforeducation.org

Akshaya Patra Foundation by Paul Lee, partner and Nithya Das, associate

January

http://www.foodforeducation.org


Public Advocates Inc. is a nonprofi t law fi rm and advocacy organization that challenges the systemic causes of

poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy. In 2007, Public

Advocates turned to Goodwin Procter for support in a new case, Renee v. Spellings, et al., in which Goodwin

worked with Public Advocates on behalf of a coalition of California parents, students and community groups. This

coalition challenged a U.S. Department of Education regulation that allows teaching interns to be labeled as “highly

qualifi ed,” which, in turn, has permitted teachers still in training to be concentrated in low-income schools, deprived

parents of accurate information about the qualifi cations of their child’s teacher, and allowed schools to side-step

requirements to recruit and employ “highly qualifi ed” teachers.

In February 2008, Goodwin invested hundreds of hours in this case, working with Public Advocates to draft the

plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion. In this motion, the plaintiffs argued that the defendants’ regulation defi ning

“highly qualifi ed teacher” to include interns exceeds the scope of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, and thereby

violates the Administrative Procedure Act.

Goodwin attorneys and staff researched and focused on the use of the terms “highly qualifi ed” and “fully qualifi ed”

in the legislative history of the No Child Left Behind Act. Discussions regarding these terms supported the plaintiffs’

argument that “highly qualifi ed” teachers were meant to be fully accredited – not interns working to obtain

accreditation.

On June 17, 2008 a federal court upheld the Department of Education regulations at issue, and the plaintiffs appealed

that decision. On August 26, 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the request to expedite the

appeal, and on February 11, 2009 the argument was heard in an expedited hearing in front of a three-judge panel

in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Renee v. Duncan, et al. (formerly Renee v. Spellings). We are currently

waiting for this decision to be rendered.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.publicadvocates.org

Public Advocates by Elizabeth Stone, associate

February

http://www.publicadvocates.org


Goodwin Procter has been working with the D.C. Bar Pro Bono Program’s Advocacy & Justice Clinic since

its inception in 1993. As Chair of the D.C. Bar Pro Bono Committee, Goodwin Procter senior counsel

Stephen Pollak was instrumental in designing and launching the clinic, which provides lawyers in private

and government practice the opportunity to help people who cannot afford counsel. The clinic regularly hosts intake

sessions at which lawyers interview, and subsequently represent, indigent clients in family, housing, public benefi ts and

consumer law matters. Successful resolution of these “bread-and-butter” poverty law cases profoundly affect the lives

of clients by helping them avoid homelessness, stabilize their families and secure income to buy the bare necessities

to survive.

On March 7, 2008, seven attorneys from Goodwin’s Washington D.C. offi ce attended an intake session hosted by

the D.C. Pro Bono Program. Our lawyers met with prospective clients and listened to their stories and evaluated legal

claims that might be used to vindicate their rights. This provided a unique opportunity to “put a face” to the clients

for whom we would be advocating. By the end of the session, each of the participating attorneys had agreed to

represent a client.

By joining forces with the Advocacy & Justice Clinic, Goodwin Procter is insuring that low-income D.C. residents

secure individual justice and have a voice in areas that are vitally important in their day-to-day lives. And, through

their participation in the clinic, our lawyers are, once again, able to make a signifi cant and lasting difference in the

lives of their pro bono clients.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/pro_bono/

about_the_program/serving_the_community/index.cfm

DC Bar Pro Bono Program Advocacy & Justice Clinicby Thomas Mikula, partner and Jeffrey Skinner, associate

March

http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/pro_bono/

10

In the Arena supports Olympic-caliber athletes with natural leadership skills as they mentor disadvantaged kids

and provide much-needed community service programs across the country. In exchange, the athletes receive

stipends from In the Arena that help support them as they vigorously train to excel in their specifi c Olympic

sports. Through placement of the highest-caliber role models in American communities, In the Arena strives, in its

words, to inculcate in today’s youth “a development of character and integrity, a thirst for excellence and a pervasive

appreciation for the merits of civic engagement.” In 2007, Goodwin Procter attorneys Stephanie Paré and Jennifer

Berylson helped form In the Arena as a nonprofi t and obtained its tax-exempt status. We have provided periodic

general counsel to the organization since.

In April 2008, attorneys Bob Crawford and Gessingga Storer assisted the organization with protecting its trademarked

name and logo, which they had shepherded through the registration process the year before. This process culminated

in the issuance of Certifi cates of Registration by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Offi ce. Bob and Gessingga also helped

counsel In the Arena when the company received a “sham” notifi cation from an entity offering phony services, and

requesting thousands of dollars in fees in connection with In the Arena’s newly registered trademarks.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.in-the-arena.org

In the Arenaby Stephanie Paré, partner and Gessingga Storer, associate

April

http://www.in-the-arena.org


In 1999, Hassan arrived in the United States after fl eeing a work camp in Somalia and living in hiding in Kenya.

His father and brother had been killed, his wife and sister had been assaulted, and he had been captured twice,

beaten and left for dead – all because they were members of the minority Bajun clan in Somalia. Through the

Political Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR) Project, we were matched up with Hassan to help secure his

safety and freedom in the United States. We accomplished this in 2001.

We then helped Hassan apply for derivative asylum for his wife, Safi a. Due to the lack of a stable government in

Somalia, Hassan was not able to authenticate his marriage certifi cate and prove he was married to Safi a, and the

petition was denied. After Safi a arrived in this country, we agreed to represent her in fi ling her own asylum petition.

Since she, too, was unable to authenticate her marriage certifi cate, Safi a’s petition was referred to the Immigration

Court, and the government sought to remove her from the country.

In May 2008, Goodwin attorneys, paralegals and staff spent over 150 hours preparing for Safi a’s hearing before the

Immigration Court. They prepared a legal brief demonstrating that Safi a was entitled to asylum both as Hassan’s wife

and on account of the persecution she herself had suffered; identifi ed and prepared expert witnesses to testify about the

physical and psychological manifestations of the trauma she had endured; and identifi ed and prepared an Islamic law

expert to opine on the validity of Safi a and Hassan’s marriage under “sharia,” or Islamic law. On August 14, 2008, an

immigration judge granted Safi a asylum both as Hassan’s wife, and of her own right – the culmination of nine years of

Goodwin Procter’s representation of this family.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.pairproject.org

Political Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR) Project by Elianna Marziani, associate

May

http://www.pairproject.org

14

The Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law and Justice operates on the theory that law is not just something

to restrain abuses, but also an opportunity to give people the chance to fulfi ll their potential in life. As such,

the organization seeks to develop innovative and collaborative solutions to legal problems not currently being

addressed by the public or private sectors. Massachusetts Appleseed turned to Goodwin Procter to support its new

initiative entitled “Keep Kids in Class: Breaking the School to Prison Pipeline.” The project examines the intersection

of school discipline, zero-tolerance policies and youth entering the juvenile justice system in Massachusetts, and seeks

to mitigate the effects of school disciplinary proceedings on the increasing rates of drop-outs and juvenile delinquency.

This effort began in June 2008 with a 50-state survey of zero-tolerance laws. Our attorneys worked with Massachusetts

Appleseed to determine the scope and nature of the issues created by a zero-tolerance approach to school discipline.

We then assisted the organization with developing a framework to analyze school discipline data, and to defi ne the

precise data needed from the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) in order to

conduct that analysis. Goodwin attorneys also researched the privacy issues related to DESE’s release of this data and

drafted a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain it.

Our attorneys have met with certain Juvenile Court judges to gain their perspective on the impact of school discipline

on the juvenile justice system. The ideas developed from these interviews were then incorporated into a comprehensive

judicial survey in order to better understand the judicial perspective on this issue. We also made signifi cant contribu-

tions to drafting proposed legislation which, if enacted, will decrease the number of students removed from school for

nonviolent offenses across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.massappleseed.org

Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law and Justiceby James McGarry, partner; Catalina Azuero, associate; and Beth Norton, associate

June

http://www.massappleseed.org

16

Photos by John Rae for ACCION International.

16


ACCION International is a nonprofi t organization with a mission of giving people the fi nancial tools they need

– microenterprise loans, business training and other fi nancial services – to work their way out of poverty. The

organization partners with microfi nance institutions in 25 countries in Latin America, Asia, Africa, the Carib-

bean and the United States. With a small amount of start-up capital (loans can be for as little as $100) and continuing

business support, ACCION and its lending partners help the poor create and sustain microenterprise ventures, such as

selling vegetables, sewing clothes or making papads, that help them earn enough income to support their families.

In the summer of 2008, Goodwin Procter assisted ACCION in structuring and investing in Swadhaar Finserve Private

Limited, a nonbanking fi nancial corporation in Mumbai, India focused on providing microfi nance services to the

urban poor. Despite the tremendous need in India for fi nancial services in urban areas, most Indian microfi nance

initiatives target the rural poor. Swadhaar is addressing this gap by providing loans mainly to urban women

microentrepreneurs between the ages of 18 and 55, and is aiming to serve over 100,000 clients.

The legal complexity of ACCION’s investment in Swadhaar was signifi cant. A multi-disciplinary Goodwin team, led

by Alyssa Grikscheit, was able to leverage its cross-border, private equity, bank regulatory, tax and other expertise to

insure that at the time of the closing of the investment in Swadhaar all the necessary capital, governance, management,

services and other critical tools were in place.

With the Swadhaar investment complete, Goodwin is helping ACCION with other investments in microfi nance

institutions in regions of need around the world. The fi rm is also working with ACCION to develop workshops to

keep their personnel informed of best practices as they make additional investments in microfi nance institutions in

new and challenging environments.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.accion.org

ACCION Internationalby Alyssa Grikscheit, partner and Shilesh Muralidhara, associate

July

http://www.accion.org


The Massachusetts Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership (CWRP) is a public/private initiative whose

mission is to restore degraded or impaired wetlands throughout Massachusetts. In conjunction with

public partners from federal and state agencies, corporations, law fi rms and environmental consultants devote

time and talent to identify and complete signifi cant restoration projects. Private sector contributions – in the form of

money or hard work – is leveraged to compete for public funds and achieve impressive results. As of 2008, CWRP had

completed 55 projects restoring nearly 1,500 acres of wetlands.

In August 2008, Goodwin Procter assisted with the largest restoration project undertaken by CWRP to date: the

1,100 acre Herring River restoration project in the town of Wellfl eet. Simple in concept, the project involves the

removal of tide gates from an existing dam to allow the reintroduction of tidal fl ow to the upstream marsh areas.

Goodwin attorneys researched the statutory and regulatory requirements potentially triggered by removal of the dam.

The analysis of the legal implications of removing the dam was just one component of a series of the work performed

for CWRP. Earlier in the Herring River project, Goodwin attorneys evaluated potential tax implications for private

landowners regarding the sale or donation of conservation restrictions that would be necessary to complete this

restoration effort. More recently, we provided assistance through CWRP for the incorporation of a nonprofi t

organization to serve as a fundraising entity for charitable donations in support of the project. By assisting with these

various tasks, Goodwin’s work has cut across many practice areas and has helped CWRP achieve some wonderful

results for the environment.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.cwrp.org

Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnershipby Robert Fitzgerald, senior counsel

August

http://www.cwrp.org

20

In September 2008, the Boston Bar Association awarded Goodwin Procter with the prestigious Thurgood

Marshall Pro Bono Award in recognition of the fi rm’s dedication to tackling the serious issue of wrongful criminal

convictions through its work with the New England Innocence Project (NEIP). Founded in 2000 by Goodwin

partner Joseph Savage and others, NEIP is an independent, nonprofi t organization which has been coordinated on

a pro bono basis by a team of Goodwin attorneys, paralegals and case assistants, and physically hosted by Goodwin

Procter. NEIP provides pro bono legal assistance to inmates who are challenging their wrongful convictions based on

DNA or other new evidence. The organization is also committed to legal reform that will hasten the identifi cation and

release of innocent prisoners and ensure that wrongful convictions are, to the extent possible, prevented in the future.

To date, through NEIP and similar groups nationwide, at least 234 wrongly convicted individuals across the country

have been exonerated by DNA evidence.

Each year, the Goodwin NEIP team and the project’s network of volunteer attorneys and law students screen dozens of

cases to identify those in which DNA testing of forensic evidence (or other investigative techniques) have the potential

to exonerate. More than 25 Goodwin attorneys have worked on active NEIP matters, representing several inmates

in New England in their pursuit of exoneration through DNA. Goodwin attorneys Joe Savage, Jennifer Chunias and

Wayne Budd also serve on the NEIP board of trustees.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.newenglandinnocence.org

New England Innocence Projectby Alison Douglass, partner

September

http://www.newenglandinnocence.org


Goodwin Procter partner Joseph Savage accepts the Thurgood Marshall Pro Bono Award from Boston Bar Association president Kathy Weinman. Photo by Aaron J. K. Ostow.

22

In 2007, the German government created the Ghetto Work Payment Program – a reparations program to benefi t

those who performed work in Nazi-controlled ghettos. The program is designed to issue a one-time payment of

2,000 euros to Holocaust survivors who worked in a ghetto under German control during World War II. For the

survivors (most of whom are in their 80s and 90s, and many of whom are struggling to make ends meet), the money

they may receive from the program makes a critical difference in meeting basic living needs – rent, food and medicine.

Beyond the needed fi nancial assistance, this program provides an important measure of recognition from the German

government regarding what the survivors endured, and what it took to survive.

In 2008, Bet Tzedek, a legal services program in Los Angeles, pioneered a legal clinic to assist Holocaust survivors in

navigating through the German application form in order to participate in the program. Bet Tzedek then rolled out

this clinic model nationwide by helping to form teams, led by fi rms around the country in partnership with nonprofi t

organizations, and sharing its substantive and practical knowledge about how to service clients in this area. In Boston,

Goodwin Procter served as the coordinating law fi rm, and in California, New York and Washington, D.C. we were

among the participating law fi rms. Throughout all Goodwin Procter offi ces, over 100 attorneys have dedicated 1,076

hours to this worthy cause.

On October 16 and 23, our Boston offi ce, as the coordinating law fi rm, hosted its fi rst clinics at the Jewish Family and

Children’s Services in Waltham, Massachusetts. Through the Boston area clinics, we have helped over 82 survivors fi ll

out applications for the program. To date, seven applications have been approved. Nationally, over 360 survivors have

received payments through the German Ghetto Work Payment Program.

Additionally, attorneys in our New York and Boston offi ces have also staffed home visits for survivors who are too ill or

frail to travel to a clinic.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.bettzedek.org/holocaustrep.html

German Ghetto Work Payment Program by Shirley Sperling Paley, associate

October

http://www.bettzedek.org/holocaustrep.html

2008 Pro Bono Annual Report 232008 Pro Bono Annual Report 23

Bet Tzedek Holocaust Services attorney Volker Schmidt in discussion with Goodwin Procter partner Brooks Brown. Photo by Eric Grushky.

24

Goodwin Procter associates Amy Harman Burkart and Chelsea Teachout took part in Election Protection as “mobile legal volunteers” in South Boston.


As record numbers of voters turned out at the polls on Election Day on November 4, 2008, over 100

Goodwin Procter lawyers from our Massachusetts, New York, Washington, D.C. and California offi ces

joined with Election Protection to support voters’ efforts to exercise their legal right to vote. The Election

Protection program is the largest nonpartisan legal program of its kind, and is supported by a coalition of groups led

by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Out of our Boston offi ce, for example, more than 50 Goodwin Procter staff participated as “mobile legal volunteers,”

fanning out in teams of two to polling places across the city of Boston and in Manchester and Nashua, New Hamp-

shire to answer would-be voters’ legal questions and monitor polling places. The teams handled a wide range of voter

questions, and one team had to notify poll workers of impermissible electioneering activity, which was halted.

Other Goodwin Procter lawyers throughout the country helped staff call centers in which they received calls from

voters around the country who had dialed Election Protection’s hotline number. The hotline, advertised on the NBC

television network and elsewhere, produced a steady stream of calls. Our team members joined other lawyers and

law students in their cities in using Election Protection 2008’s online voter registration data to assist voters. The calls

ranged from issues such as whether the individual was a registered voter, and if so, where to vote, to polling-place

problems requiring troubleshooting through contact with election offi cials. Despite long lines at many locations,

the day went smoothly. All Goodwin Procter teams reported an exciting day at the polls. The consensus was,

“we made a difference!”

For more information on this organization, please visit www.866ourvote.org

Election Protectionby Jack Falvey, partner and John Haggerty, partner

November

http://www.866ourvote.org


In December 2008 our lawyers assisted in preparing a Supreme Court merits brief on behalf of the American Bar

Association (ABA) in Caperton v. Massey Coal Company. We had previously helped draft an amicus curiae brief

in August 2008 in support of the original petition for certiorari in this matter and were gratifi ed when the court

granted the writ.

The case raised the question whether constitutional due process requires a judge to recuse himself or herself from a

case involving a litigant who had made a large contribution to the judge’s election campaign. The facts involve a justice

of the West Virginia Supreme Court who had received over $3 million in campaign contributions from the CEO of

Massey Coal Company, but refused to recuse himself from the appeal of a multi-million dollar judgment against the

company and then cast the deciding vote to set the judgment aside.

We researched the legislative history of the Constitution’s due process clauses and then, working with the ABA’s

Committee on Judicial Independence and later with its Standing Committee on Amicus Curiae Briefs, helped draft

a brief that contends that public confi dence in the judiciary is threatened by cases like this one, notes that ABA

standards mandating recusal in cases involving the appearance of impropriety are typically self-enforcing and asks the

court to identify the due process considerations that govern recusal when a major contributor is a party. Working with

both ABA committees was a treat and a challenge as we sought to craft a brief that would accurately refl ect the ABA’s

views. At oral argument on March 3, 2009, one of the justices referred to the ABA recusal standards in noting the

diffi culty in identifying an appropriate due process clause test for recusal.

On June 8, 2009, in a 5-4 decision, the court held that due process required the recusal of the state court justice in this

case. The opinion cited the ABA’s brief and noted that almost every state has adopted the ABA’s objective standard for

recusal to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

For more information on this organization, please visit www.abanet.org/

ABA Amicus Brief in Caperton v. Massey Coal Company by William Sheehan, partner

December

http://www.abanet.org/

28

Akshaya Patra Foundation

Susan Abbott, Nithya Das, Lalitha Gunturi, Kate Lee, Paul Lee, Sejal Shah and Kristina Wardwell

Public Advocates

David Cook, Robert Fitzgerald, Kathryn Georgian, Eric Jeffrey, Ajay Malshe, Elizabeth Mason, Nicole Perroton, John Rich, Christine Sama, Marie Scott, Jeffrey Simes, Elizabeth Stone, Patrick Thompson and Alison Jean Wais

DC Bar Pro Bono Program Advocacy & Justice Clinic

Jeffrey Ahdoot, Julia Black, Soyong Cho, Adam Chud, Kristin Davenport, Monica Douglas, Eric Goldberg, Maria Green, Eric Hager, Michael Isenman, Sirisha Kalicheti, Nicholas Kim, Mary Kostel, Ann Gavin-Lawrence, Katrina Loffelman, Thomas Mikula, Melisa Moonan, Stephen Pollak, Rachel Rosenthal, Sabrina Rose-Smith, Marie Scott, Jae Shin, Katherine Shinners and Jeffrey Skinner

In the Arena

Susan Abbott, Jennifer Berylson, Robert Crawford, Michael Fairhurst, Robert O’Connell, Stephanie Paré, Miriam Rovner, Ellie Simon and Gessingga Storer

Politcal Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR)

Robert Crawford, Dennis D’Angelo, Rosalie Fazio, Daniela Juvani, Jonathan Lent, Elianna Marziani, Kenneth Parsigian, George Schneider, Gessingga Storer and Linda Trieu

Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law and Justice

Katherine Aldrich, Catalina Azuero, Naina Bhadra, Elaine Herrmann Blais, Don Kennedy, James McGarry, Beth Norton, Barry O’Connell and Dalton Randall

ACCION International

Janet Andolina, Alyssa Grikscheit, Ajay Malshe, Thomas Meriam, Shilesh Muralidhara and Sejal Shah

Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership

Susan Abbott, Corrine Belt, Alyssa Chandler, Christophe Courchesne, Robert Fitzgerald, Collette Goodman, Nia Fripp, Janet Rickershauser and Caroline Stevenson

New England Innocence Project

James Abely, Laura Acosta, David Apfel, Yael Aufgang, Catalina Azuero, Andrea Boivin, Yvonne Chan, Jennifer Chunias, Caroline Cochenour, Kimberly Dean, Gauri Dhavan, Alison Douglass, Caroline Driscoll, Lisa English, Jennifer Fischesser, Bernard Flanagan, Robert Frederickson, Juan Garcia, Ilan Graff, Michal Herzfeld, Christiaan Highsmith, Stephen Hoeplinger, Daniel Kalik, Natalie Kaminsky, Francis Kelleher, Terrence Knapp, Leah Leavitt, Elaine Lin, Devin Lindsay, John Mangones, Elianna Mar-ziani, James McGarry, Nicholas Mitrokostas, Ambica Mohabir, Steven Pacini, Michael Perry, Jason Port, Christina Queiros, Neil Raphael, Elizabeth Regan, Laura Rosenbaum, Joseph Savage, Jeremy Scanlan, Jennifer Schultz, Marcy Smirnoff, Noah Spauld-ing, Janet Taylor, John Taylor, Matthew Thaler, Kenneth Thayer,

ContributorsThe following pages list the attorneys, paralegals and summer associates who worked on the 12 pro bono matters highlighted within this report.


Brandon Thompson, Jonathan Thompson, Kelly Trainor, Arivee Vargas, Jeanna Volp, Shakiva Wade, Damian Wilmot, Amanda Wong, Sarah Wrubel, Christine Yancovitz, Adrienne Zack and Tracy Zupancis

German Ghetto Work Payment Program

Jonathan Auerbach, Jeffrey Barry, Michael Bavli, Craig Blumsack, Brooks Brown, Alyssa Chandler, Marie DeAndrade, David Dobin, Francisco Fierro, Jamie Fleckner, Jaclyn Freeman, Jessica Gill, Stuart Glass, Heidi Goldstein Shepherd, David Goldstone, Bruce Graham, Jung Han, Amy Harman Burkart, Yaniv Heled, David Henken, Julie Hoffman, Benjamin Hron, Gregg Katz, Nicholas Kim, Jennifer King, Andrew Kirsh, Rena Kramer, Cynthia Lipp-man, Andrew Levin, Andrew Moosmann, Susan Morningstern, David Nemes, Phuong-Ha Ngo, Rachel Oshry, Shirley Paley, Virna Pepe, Douglas Praw, Emily Rapalino, Shepard Remis, Barbara Rutkowski, Adrienne Scerbak, Alexis Shapiro, Benjamin Shapiro, Alex Shukhman, Justin Silberberg, Jordana Sobey, Jack Steele, Craig Todaro, Natasha Us, Daryl Wiesen, Benjamin Wish, David Young and Lisa Zebrowski

Election Protection

Richard Arculin, Jonathan Auerbach, Benjamin Baum, Jennifer Bell, Nomi Berenson, Christopher Brancati, Frances Anna Brickman, Nathan Brodeur, Katherine Bromberg, Harley Brown, Stacey Brown, Caroline Bullerjahn, Melissa Celli, Brandon Clippinger, Erik Collins, Sarah Conde, Christophe Courchesne,

Cheryce Cryer, Dennis D’Angelo, Nithya Das, Chad Davis, Ethan Davis, Kimberly Dean, Marta Delsignore, Marva Deskins, Vilas Dhar, Silvia Diaz, Allison Driscoll, Caroline Driscoll, John Falvey, Francisco Fierro, James Fox, Jessica Gary, Liana Gross-man, Lalitha Gunturi, Catalina Gutierrez, John Haggerty, Amy Harman Burkart, Christiaan Highsmith, Charleen Hsuan, Patrick Hurley, Sirisha Kalicheti, Francis Kelleher, Richard Kerr, Elizabeth Killingsworth, Conor Kilroy, Eric Kim, Jennifer King, Christopher Kocher, David Koenigsberg Black, Yoel Kranz, Hans-Christian Latta, Josh Launer, Michael Levesque, Michael Litchman, Jennifer Luz, Matthew Manning, Elianna Marziani, Katherine McKenney, William Monnin-Browder, Melisa Moonan, Andrew Moosmann, Siobhan Murphy, David Nemes, David Newton, Rachel Oshry, Jessica Packard, Michael Pappone, Nathan Perez, Segev Phillips, Joseph Piacquad, Brian Prew, Tara Ramchandani, Davina Reid, Lindsey Repose, Therese Rohrbeck, Laura Rosenbaum, Rachel Rosenthal, Shailesh Sahay, Kate Salley, Rachel Samuels, Erin Russ Scherzer, Luke Scheuer, George Schneider, David Schumacher, Jonathan Sclarsic, Paras Shah, Sejal Shah, Jeffrey Skinner, Marcy Smirnoff, Meghan Spillane, Kenda Stewart, Ai Tajima, Chelsea Teachout, Kenneth Thayer, Darren Thornton, Lindra Trieu, Benjamin Tschann, Matthew Tulchin, Jenna Ventorino, Mitchell Webber, Anya Wittenborg and Maryana Zubok

ABA Amicus Brief in Caperton v. Massey Coal Company

Robert Carroll, Sarah Conkright, Marva Deskins, Bernard Flanagan, John Rich and William Sheehan

30

In 2008, the fi rm and individual attorneys were proud to be honored with the following awards and recognition:

February 2008

Goodwin Procter received a Special Acknowledgement from the New York Lawyers for the Public Interest

April 2008

Partner Kenneth Parsigian received Special Honors at a Year End Celebration hosted by Boston University

School of Law

April 2008

Goodwin Procter received Special Recognition at the D.C. Judicial Pro Bono Breakfast, hosted by the D.C. Courts

June 2008

Goodwin Procter received Special Recognition from the Political Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR) Project

July 2008

Partner David Apfel and associate Danielle Picozzi received Goodwin Procter’s Robert B. Fraser Pro Bono Award,

named after the fi rm’s former managing partner. Also recognized was a multi-offi ce team of Goodwin attorneys for

their help in forming CheckSpring Bank in New York.

Recognition


September 2008

Goodwin Procter was honored with the Thurgood Marshall Award for Pro Bono Work by the Boston

Bar Association

September 2008

Partners Stephen Poss and Kevin Martin and associates Christina Nolan, Scott Nardi, Nicholas Pilchak and

Michael Sugrue received Special Recognition Awards from the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund

October 2008

Partner Thomas Meriam and associates Laurie Holsey and Michael Bavli received the 2008 Pro Bono Award for

Outstanding Service from the Legal Aid Society in New York

December 2008

Partner Anna Dodson was honored with the Women of Justice Award, selected by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly in

partnership with the Women’s Bar Association and the Massachusetts Association of Women Lawyers

32

2008 Committee Members:

William P. Mayer, Co-Chair

Thomas J. Mikula, Co-Chair

Brooks R. Brown

Roberto M. Braceras

Christopher P. Davis

Inez Friedman-Boyce

Christopher J. Garvey

Satish M. Kini

Appreciation

Goodwin Procter’s Pro Bono Committee wishes to acknowledge the 840+ attorneys, paralegals, summer associates

and administrative staff members who were active participants in the fi rm’s Pro Bono Program in 2008. Their

support, dedication and energy are what makes our pro bono efforts possible.

Thank you.

©2009 Goodwin Procter LLP. All rights reserved. This brochure may be considered advertising under the ethical rules of certain jurisdictions.

Michael J. Pappone

Bruce J. Rader

Valerie E. Ross

Jon D. Schneider

Jeffrey A. Simes

Patrick S. Thompson

Carolyn Rosenthal, Pro Bono Manager

For more information about our Pro Bono Program, please visit our website at www.goodwinprocter.com

http://www.goodwinprocter.com

BOSTON HONG KONG LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SILICON VALLEY WASHINGTON DC GOODWINPROCTER.COM

GOOD CAUSE

Documents

Transcript of GOOD CAUSE