SLC joined a coalition of LGBTQ+ advocacy groups in North Central Florida to push for Alachua County to pass a ban on conversion therapy for minors. Conversion therapy is a harmful and scientifically denounced practice with the goal of changing or reducing one’s same-sex attraction or altering a person’s gender identity through physical treatments like aversive conditioning, and a variety of behavioral, cognitive, and psychoanalytic practices.

In 2003, a fire engulfed Kennedy Homes, a federally subsidized multi-family housing complex for low- and extremely low-income families located in Gainesville. The fire was caused by leaking gas lines, a symptom of years of neglect and poor maintenance. The complex was closed due to unsafe conditions, and all of the residents were forced to relocate.

Historically, race discrimination by property owners and real estate agents helped create dramatic patterns of housing and neighborhood inequality. We helped individuals remedy race discrimination in housing on behalf of Antoinette Arnao, an African-American woman who experienced discriminatory treatment when attempting to lease an apartment in Central Florida. The leasing agent refused to show her an available unit or provide her with an application, but then treated a white individual more favorably when she visited the same complex a few days later. SLC filed a race discrimination lawsuit in federal court, which was settled to provide damages to Arnao.

SLC brought the first lawsuit under federal disability discrimination laws to challenge Florida’s application of zoning restrictions on group homes for persons with disabilities. The lawsuit was initiated by Collier County for alleged public nuisance and local zoning code violations that restricted non-familial residential groups. We filed counterclaims on behalf of residents with disabilities based on the federal Rehabilitation Act and Civil Rights Act, and our federal constitutional claims were upheld by the trial court.

In one of the first cases to challenge federal agency employment discrimination based on disability (here, history of epilepsy), the federal appeals court established a private cause of action which allows persons to bring future lawsuits to challenge discrimination. This precedent was followed by other federal courts of appeal and subsequently was adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court. Co-counsel was John R. Nettles.

In a case under the Florida Human Rights Act to challenge the termination of an employee because of his perceived history of epilepsy, the federal district court wrote a comprehensive opinion setting out the procedures, burdens of proof, and substantive standards for disability employment cases that became the benchmark for future cases under Florida law. Co-counsel was Neil Chonin.

To protect the rights of employees with contagious diseases, SLC co-authored a brief in a case that resulted in a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that people with tuberculosis and other contagious diseases are covered by federal anti-discrimination laws. The Court ruled that employment cannot be terminated without an objective showing of a probable risk of harm to others. Lead counsel was George K. Rahdert.

We defended a service provider for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities against an attempt to block the establishment of a group home in a residential district. The trial court’s holding that group homes can be barred by a deed restriction limiting use of subdivision property to single families was unsuccessfully appealed. Subsequent legislation in the Florida 1989 session, known as the Community Residential Homes Act, created a new Chapter 419 and alleviated the problem of barriers to siting of group homes for disabled citizens.

SLC defended a tenant with mental illness in an eviction action filed by the owner of a privately owned, but federally subsidized, housing complex for the elderly and persons with disabilities. The tenant’s sole source of income was his Social Security disability payment. If evicted, it was unlikely he would find other housing. The eviction action alleged lease violations for behaviors that were directly related to his mental illness. We requested, as a “reasonable accommodation” under the Fair Housing Act, that the owner suspend the eviction to allow time for our client to seek and receive additional treatment for his mental illness, but the management did not respond. We settled for damages and dismissal of the eviction action.

Plaintiffs Jami Claire, Kathryn Lane, and Ahmir Murphy are state employees who have been denied medically necessary treatment for gender dysphoria because of the state’s categorical exclusion of coverage for medically necessary gender-affirming care in health care plans provided to state employees. Some transgender people experience gender dysphoria, the medical diagnosis for the clinically significant distress sometimes resulting from the incongruence between a person’s gender identity and their sex assigned at birth. Left untreated, this serious medical condition often leads to debilitating distress, depression, anxiety, impairment of function, and self-harm, including suicide.

In a First Amendment challenge to the restrictions on certified public accountants from soliciting business in person, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Florida’s ban was an impermissible restriction of commercial speech. Co-counsel was Public Citizen Litigation Group.​​​​​​​

This First Amendment case came out of the political demonstrations against the first U.S.-based meetings of the Free Trade Area of the Americas to take place in Miami. Plaintiffs sought, inter alia, a temporary restraining order to prevent enforcement of the City of Miami’s unconstitutional permit laws concerning marches and demonstrations on public sidewalks, streets, and parks, as well as other regulations restricting the size and activities of public assemblies and parades.

When law enforcement coordinated an all-out assault on the First Amendment during the protests of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) in November 2003 in Miami, SLC successfully challenged the mass false arrests and use of excessive force by over 40 local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to deliberately disrupt lawful protests. We won significant monetary settlements for violations of protesters’ rights to challenge police and government misconduct based on false arrest, use of excessive force and unlawful political profiling against activists for merely exercising their First Amendment rights. Co-counsel were Carol A. Sobel, Robert W. Ross, Jr., Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Carl Messineo and Jonathan Moore.

The right to privacy and equal protection won out over the federal Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) unprecedented political interference and unjustified delay in approving emergency contraception (also known as the Morning-After Pill) as an over-the-counter drug for all women without any age restriction. With plaintiffs from Gainesville, Florida, this action was brought on behalf of women, girls, reproductive rights organizations and National Women’s Liberation. After an eight-year battle, the Court ordered the FDA to make emergency contraception available over-the-counter and eliminated the prescription requirement, age restrictions, and any other restrictions on how it is sold. This suit had nationwide impact. Co-counsel was the Center for Reproductive Rights.

After Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, litigation ensued to compel the National Archivist to publish the ERA in the US Constitution. With pro bono co-counsel Baker Donelson, we filed an amicus in the federal Virginia and Massachusetts cases on behalf of the US Council of Mayors and ERA organizations from Georgia, South Carolina and Louisiana. We explained the import and impact of the ERA in a policy brief, arguing that ratification of the ERA would put the United States in the company of all other industrialized nations in guaranteeing equality for women; lead to sex discrimination claims being subjected to a strict scrutiny analysis by courts along with race, religion and national origin; and provide uniform protections from sex-based discrimination across the United States for the first time in history.

In another unauthorized practice of law case, we represented a labor relations consultant for representing his employer in a state administrative proceeding. This case established precedent that resolved the conflict between the Florida Supreme Court's authority to regulate the practice of law and the Legislature's authority to provide for and regulate administrative agency proceedings. The Florida Supreme Court ruled that the Legislature has the authority to allow qualified lay advocates to represent others in administrative proceedings. Following this decision, SLC participated extensively in drafting model rules, which were adopted, governing representative appearances of lay advocates before state agencies.

More options are needed to address the justice gap and assist those who cannot afford a lawyer. Two unauthorized practice of law cases resulted in making it easier for litigants to represent themselves or hire qualified lay advocates. SLC represented a paralegal being prosecuted by The Florida Bar for unauthorized practice of law for assistance she provided to self-filers seeking uncontested divorces. This case led to the Florida Supreme Court’s directive to the Bar to undertake a study of Florida's unmet legal needs. The “Furman Study” led to the creation of the Interest on Trust Accounts (IOTA) Program for funding legal services for the poor and the adoption of simplified divorce procedures and other reforms. Co-counsel was Public Citizen Litigation Group.

For more than five years, indigent litigants in the Florida Sixth Judicial Circuit were denied access to appellate courts for one reason: they could not afford to pay the $400 filing fee. When SLC attempted to file appeals with the circuit court on behalf of homeless individuals, our clients had the courthouse doors slammed in their face due to an administrative order that prohibited filing fee waivers for indigent litigants. SLC challenged the administrative order. The appellate court ordered the circuit court to grant indigent filing fee waivers to all of our clients.

Pro se litigants were not allowed to file family court pleadings (including name change petitions) without first purchasing and paying for services of the Clerk’s Self-Help Center. Our clients attended a forms preparation clinic hosted by Legal Services of Greater Miami and their pro se petitions for name change that were filed through Florida’s E-Filing portal were “abandoned” by the Clerk of Court who refused to docket the petitions. We filed petitions for writ of mandamus with the Third DCA, which were transferred to the Circuit Court. The Clerk refused to docket and after we filed new writs of mandamus compelling the docketing of the original writs, the Clerk docketed the original writs.

This case was filed under Florida's Sunshine Law challenging the City's amendments to its trespass ordinance in violation of statutory requirements for enacting ordinances. During SLC's Catron litigation against the St. Petersburg, the City amended its trespass ordinance in response to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 2011. At the time, it appeared the City had violated the Sunshine Law by deliberating in secret during a closed attorney-client session to amend the ordinance, but SLC had to wait until after the Catron litigation concluded at the end of 2012 to obtain a copy of the transcript from the closed session. SLC obtained the transcripts and filed this lawsuit on behalf of Rev. Bruce Wright, who we also represented in a challenge to a trespass warning banning him from Williams Park for one year.