Dechert
Our pro bono program allows me to represent people in incredibly worthy causes who would not otherwise have a voice.
May 04, 2020 at 02:06 PM
4 minute read
Describe your firm's philosophy on pro bono service.
Dechert lawyers approach pro bono with the same energy, enthusiasm and resources as work for commercial clients. We strive to find projects that make a difference and that match our lawyers' personal interests and the needs of the community. Headline initiatives focus on protecting the rights to vote, to freedom of speech and to live free from discrimination, violence and persecution. Globally, our lawyers performed over 90,000 pro bono hours last year, equivalent to 5.5% of billable hours.
What are the two biggest cases your firm worked on in 2019? Tell us more about those cases and how you reached the outcome.
Pro bono client Shaurn Thomas spent 24 years in prison for a murder he did not commit. Despite questionable witnesses and evidence concealed from the defense, he was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole in 1994. Working alongside the Pennsylvania Innocence Project, I unearthed a lab report that had not been provided to Thomas' original defense team. Additional evidence later came to light strengthening Thomas' alibi and his conviction was subsequently vacated. Shortly after, Dechert filed a civil rights action against the city of Philadelphia and two of its detectives, which in December 2019 led to a $4.15 million settlement, the largest Philadelphia has ever paid in a non-DNA exoneration case.
More recently, we won freedom for pro bono client Willie Veasy, who was also serving a life sentence for a murder conviction based largely on a false confession that Veasy said had been fabricated by Philadelphia detectives. We scoured police files and trial transcripts from the Thomas case, finding a pattern of coerced false confessions and witness statements, many involving the same detectives who convicted both Veasy and Thomas. We filed for relief, and the Philadelphia District Attorney's Conviction Integrity Unit agreed that Veasy was wrongly convicted. As a result, the court vacated the conviction, allowing him to walk free.
What was the most satisfying aspect of that work?
The eight years I worked on the Thomas case literally changed my life. It brought the two of us so close that we became best friends. We still speak every day. And now Veasy is another happy addition to my family's lives and to our lives at Dechert. Both are frequent visitors to Dechert's Philadelphia office, where they are extremely popular. The Thomas case also convinced me that freeing the innocent is a moral imperative. Witnessing the incredibly positive impact that our work has had on the lives and families of these two men moves all of us. It is simply the most satisfying work I have ever accomplished.
What other pro bono matters is the firm working on?
Among notable voting rights cases, we successfully challenged a New York state law that removed the names of individuals from the poll book if they failed to return just one piece of election mail. In January, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that New York state's refusal to include "inactive" voters on poll ledgers, which had disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters, violated the National Voter Registration Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Elsewhere, we challenged the criminalization of the homeless in Texas and litigated to prevent the deportation of 4,000 Liberians, winning time for lawmakers to craft a legislative solution allowing them to remain permanently. Further afield, we also helped win freedom for a Mauritanian accountant sentenced to death by firing squad for writing a Facebook post.
Why does pro bono work matter to you as a lawyer?
Our pro bono program allows me to represent people in incredibly worthy causes who would not otherwise have a voice. Thomas and Veasy spent decades in prison not because they were guilty but because they were poor. Without pro bono work, innocent people would quite simply die in prison.
Responses submitted by James Figorski, senior staff attorney of the litigation practice group at in Dechert.
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
© 2025 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 AllGovernment Attorneys Face Reassignment, Rescinded Job Offers in First Days of Trump Administration
4 minute readDC Judge Chutkan Allows Jenner's $8M Unpaid Legal Fees Lawsuit to Proceed Against Sierra Leone
3 minute read4th Circuit Upholds Virginia Law Restricting Online Court Records Access
3 minute readAm Law 200 Firms Announce Wave of D.C. Hires in White-Collar, Antitrust, Litigation Practices
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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