John P. Lavelle Jr. partner with Morgan Lewis & Bockius. Courtesy photo John Lavelle, Morgan Lewis & Bockius
In April 2021, Lavelle and a firm team won a pro bono victory on behalf of low-income Pennsylvania households seeking retroactive emergency food benefits denied to them by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Working with Community Legal Services of Philadelphia (CLS), the firm had filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the USDA challenging the department's interpretation of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), which provided for emergency allotments of benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, commonly referred to as food stamps) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Gilliam v. USDA, the plaintiffs alleged USDA's misinterpretation of the FFCRA deprived nearly 40% of Pennsylvania SNAP households of emergency benefits.Power Players 2022: John Lavelle
In April 2021, John Lavelle and a firm team won a pro bono victory on behalf of low-income Pennsylvania households seeking retroactive emergency food benefits denied to them by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
June 21, 2022 at 02:03 PM
4 minute read
Q&ABy The Legal Intelligencer
John P. Lavelle Jr. partner with Morgan Lewis & Bockius. Courtesy photo
John Lavelle, Morgan Lewis & Bockius
In April 2021, Lavelle and a firm team won a pro bono victory on behalf of low-income Pennsylvania households seeking retroactive emergency food benefits denied to them by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Working with Community Legal Services of Philadelphia (CLS), the firm had filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the USDA challenging the department's interpretation of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), which provided for emergency allotments of benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, commonly referred to as food stamps) during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Gilliam v. USDA, the plaintiffs alleged USDA's misinterpretation of the FFCRA deprived nearly 40% of Pennsylvania SNAP households of emergency benefits.
This content has been archived.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 All
Matt's Corner: Court of Judicial Discipline-Presumed Prejudicial Delay
3 minute read
Ethical Considerations in Representing an Organizational Client and Its Constituents
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Over Alleged War Crimes in Gaza
- 2Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
- 3Attracted to Thompson Hine's Fee Flexibility, Morgan Lewis Litigator Switches Firms in Chicago
- 4Phila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
- 5Simpson Thacher Replenishes London Ranks With Latest Linklaters Defection
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
