[The name of each client in the case title, and any associated brief, is replaced by the proper form of the word "client."]

Client v. Healy (1985) United States Supreme Court, Docket No. 85-6147 (petitioner, denied) Police officers used excessive force, including carotid artery choke hold, to detain 35 year-old mother of seven-year old twins, jogging in running shorts and singlet, four blocks from her home, on the basis that she looked as if she were involved in criminal conduct. Detention based on police officer assertion that site of detention was high crime area. Client brought action for violation of civil rights. Jury instruction did not permit jury to consider whether police officers had reasonable belief that site of detention was high crime area. California Court of Appeal for First Appellate District, reversed, but refused to require objective basis for police officer belief that site of detention was high crime area. California Supreme Court denied petition for review on issue of objective basis for police officer belief that site of detention was high crime area. United States Supreme Court denied petition for writ of certiorari on issue of objective basis for police officer belief that site of detention was high crime area. [brief in process of conversion to HTML]

Clients v. United States (1998) United States Supreme Court, Docket No. 98-375 (petitioner, denied) Mother rendered comatose during child-birth, by admitted negligence of United Navy physicians. Clients mother, newborn daughter, and U.S. Marine corporal husband/father, sue for medical malpractice. Husband/father appointed conservator/guardian ad litem, for wife/newborn daughter, respectively. At court-supervised settlement conference, defendant United States of America offers de minimus settlement. In negotiating stance, clients' attorney opines that offered amount would not be sufficient for attorney's fees. Based on that statement, on motion of defendant United States of America, District Court removes both husband/father conservator/guardian ad litem, and clients' attorney, on basis that they have conflicts of interest. District Court appoints new attorney to act pro bono as guardian ad litem for comatose mother and newborn daughter, and another new attorney to act pro bono as attorney for comatose mother and newborn daughter. Shortly after their appointment, pro bono guardian ad litem and pro bono attorney, settle with defendant United States of America, on same basis previously rejected by husband/father as inadequate. [brief]