Decision in ABA's Fight Over Texas Pro Bono Loan Forgiveness Yet to Come
The American Bar Association and the U.S. Department of Education were in court Wednesday, but a federal judge did not issue a ruling on whether or not ABA employees qualify for public service loan forgiveness.
September 26, 2018 at 02:39 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
The American Bar Association will have to wait to find out if its employees will qualify for public service loan forgiveness.
The ABA and the U.S. Department of Education were in court Wednesday for a hearing on the ABA's request for a preliminary injunction stating that its employees are eligible for loan forgiveness, but U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly of the District of Columbia did not issue a ruling from the bench.
The two-hour hearing was the latest in a 20-month-old lawsuit the ABA filed against the Education Department, after it told several ABA employees who believed they qualified to have their federal loan balances dismissed after 10 years that they are in fact ineligible.
“The public service missions and financial well-being of our clients, and of other dedicated public servants across America, are hanging in the balance,” said Ropes & Gray partner Chong Park, who is representing the ABA. “We were glad to present the urgency of their situations to the court and look forward to its decision. Our hope is that these service-oriented professionals will be allowed to benefit from the loan forgiveness program they signed up for.”
Chetan Patil, an attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Division who is representing the Education Department, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the hearing Wednesday.
The ABA earlier this month asked Kelly to issue a preliminary injunction clarifying that its employees are eligible for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. The Education Department has previously determined that the national bar group does not meet the criteria of a public service organization because public service is not the overarching focus of its work.
But the ABA said its South Texas Pro Bono Asylum Representation Project, which provides free legal representation to detained immigrants, has been devastated by the department's denial. The project has had a difficult time recruiting and retaining staff because they cannot count on public service loan forgiveness, and is now half-staffed, according to court documents. Meanwhile, demand for the project's services skyrocketed this summer when the Trump administration introduced its family separation policy, the ABA said.
But the Education Department counters that a preliminary injunction is inappropriate given that the parties are awaiting the court's decision in cross-motions for summary judgment, which have been pending for the past year after the case was transferred to a new judge. A preliminary injunction stating that ABA employees do qualify for public service loan forgiveness would still leave the plaintiffs in limbo, since that ruling could be reversed on summary judgment, the Education Department argues.
Under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which was enacted in 2007, federal borrowers will have the remainder of their loans forgiven after 10 years of working at a qualified public service employers and making 10 years of loan payments. The first cohort of borrowers eligible for forgiveness came in 2017, but a new report from the Education Department reveals that only a tiny fraction of those who have applied for forgiveness have been approved. A mere $5.5 million in loans have been forgiven thus far.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250