Main US office location: Seaport West 155 Seaport Boulevard Boston, MA 02210-2600 www.foleyhoag.com (617) 832-1000 THE STATS No. of Attorneys: 243 No. of Offices: 4 Co-Managing Partners: Adam Kahn and Kenneth Leonetti Who s Who How many pro bono coordinators and/or partners does the firm have? 1 Please provide the primary pro bono contact(s) s information below. Rebecca M. Cazabon Pro Bono Managing Attorney (617) 832-1755 rcazabon@foleyhoag.com Approximate percentage of his/her time spent on pro bono work/administering pro bono program: 85% Does the firm have a pro bono committee? If so, how often does the committee meet? Monthly Please describe the composition of the committee: Our Pro Bono Committee consists of three partners and the firm s Pro Bono Managing Attorney. THE SCOOP Does the firm have a written pro bono policy? Can associates bring pro bono matters of interest to the firm? How does the firm decide whether to take on a pro bono matter? Most pro bono matters are referred by legal services agencies or civil rights organizations whose missions coincide with the purposes of the pro bono program. Any lawyer may also submit an application to take on a pro bono project. The pro bono committee reviews these on a case-by-case basis. Has the firm signed on to the law firm pro bono challenge? What are some of the areas of law in which your firm has performed pro bono legal work since 2014? Asylum; Bankruptcy; Civil rights; Community economic development; Consumer law and small claims court; Death penalty defense; Disability benefits; Domestic violence; Education; Elder law; Employment; Environment; Fair housing/ tenants rights; First Amendment and constitutional issues; HIV/AIDS advocacy; Homeless advocacy; Immigration; Indigent criminal defense; International human rights; Juvenile justice reform; Nonprofit corporate law; Nonprofit incorporation/tax exemptions; Nonprofit intellectual property; Parole hearings; Police misconduct; Prisoners rights; Social security law; Probate law; Public benefits; Real estate transactions; The arts and historic preservation; Veterans benefits/appeals; Voting rights Are there areas of law in which, as a matter of policy or practice, your firm does not perform pro bono work? If so, please indicate the specific areas below. If not, please select none. None List up to 10 of your firm s pro bono clients or partners since 2014, including legal service providers or clearinghouses. Greater Boston Legal Services Amnesty International France Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights 166
Kids in Need of Defense American Civil Liberties Union GLAD Legal Advocates & Defenders for the LGBTQ Community Committee for Public Counsel Services Political Asylum/Immigration Representation Project Victim Rights Law Center Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts. List up to three pro bono matters/representations that are highlights (e.g., a Supreme Court case). Working with the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, Foley Hoag filed suit in March 2015 on behalf of four students who were denied access to a state scholarship because of their immigration status. The John and Abigail Adams Scholarship is a merit-based scholarship that awards the value of all required tuition at state colleges or universities to high performing students at Massachusetts public high schools. The plaintiff students met the performance requirements and were lawfully present immigrants, but were ineligible because the scholarship was available only to citizens and certain classes of non-citizens. In November 2015, the Commonwealth s Board of Higher Education agreed to amend the guidelines, making the scholarship available to non-citizens under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, non-citizens with Temporary Protected Status, non-citizens with U-visas, and any other non-citizen eligible for in-state tuition. Justice in Aging, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), and Foley Hoag filed a class action lawsuit in March 2015 on behalf of Plaintiffs Hugh Held and Kelley Richardson-Wright and a proposed nationwide class to challenge the Social Security Administration (SSA) s policy of collecting from Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients overpayments caused by the agency s failure to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples. SSI is a benefits program that provides for basic necessities for very lowincome people over 65 and people with disabilities. These overpayments were caused by SSA s continued application of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which unconstitutionally disrespected these marriages, for over a year after the statute was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in Windsor v. United States. For months after Windsor, SSA had calculated eligibility and paid benefit amounts for these individuals as if they were single, even though they were married, which resulted in overpayments. When SSA finally recognized these marriages, the agency asked them to pay back thousands of dollars they did not have and which SSI rules did not allow them to save. Our lawsuit alleged that SSA s conduct violated the Social Security Act and the equal protection and due process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. In October 2015, after hearing of our lawsuit, a group of 39 Senators and 82 members of the House of Representatives, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Representative Mark Takano (CA), sent a letter to SSA asking the agency to waive recovery of overpayments and implement the Supreme Court s decision. The Congressional letter referenced our lawsuit. In April 2016, SSA issued a new policy that favorably addressed concerns raised in the lawsuit and the Congressional letter, providing a significant victory for individuals whose marriages were not recognized by SSA when they should have been. The agency has issued instructions to its local offices across the country to presume that a waiver of the overpayment has been requested. The new policy provides further instructions, which should result in a grant of a waiver on the grounds that the individual is without fault for the overpayment and that collection would be against equity and good conscience, as was argued in the lawsuit and the Congressional letter. The authority to deny a waiver is removed from local offices, and any denial must first be reviewed by SSA s Central Office. In June 2016, after further negotiations, the agency further modified its policy to provide the same relief for individuals whose waiver requests had been denied before the April policy change. The lifting of the U.S. military s gender-based combat exclusion ban, on orders from Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, came as a result of the efforts of groups such as No Exceptions, which was advised on a pro bono basis by Foley Hoag. Foley Hoag counseled No Exceptions on strategic legal issues related to gender integration and women in combat since the organization was formed in early 2015. No Exceptions conducted a public education campaign throughout 2015 to inform the public and decision makers about the implementation of a directive lifting the military s long-standing ban excluding women from serving in combat. That directive declared that all services were to open previously-closed positions and units to women by January 2016. According to the directive, however, armed forces could request exceptions for particular positions, but such requests had to be based on a rigorous analysis of factual data regarding the knowledge, skills and abilities needed for the position. In the years since, the branches of the U.S. armed forces conducted studies on issues of gender inclusion in their ranks, including permitting women to train side-by-side with men in elite courses that if passed qualify individuals to serve as Army Rangers. It was following such actions and subsequent analyses that on December 3, 2015, Secretary Carter announced the armed forces would open all combat positions to women regardless of their gender, and that the change would take effect in 30 days following the legally provided period of Congressional review. That review period has now passed. BY THE NUMBERS What is the total number of hours that lawyers at your US office(s) spent performing pro bono legal services, as defined by the law firm pro bono challenge, in 2014 and 2015? Do not include summer associate or non-lawyer pro bono hours in your answers. 2014: 25,898 2015: 25,081 Visit www.vault.com for company rankings, ratings and reviews to learn what it s really like to work in an industry or company and how to position yourself to land that job. 167
What was the attorney headcount in your firm s US office(s)? As of December 31, 2014: 208 As of December 31, 2015: 217 Using the number of attorneys listed above, what is the average number of pro bono hours per attorney in your firm s US office(s) during the following years? 2014: 125 2015: 116 What percentage of attorneys employed in 2014 and 2015 in your firm s US office(s) did at least 20 hours of pro bono work during that calendar year? 2014: 62% 2015: 57% SUPERVISION AND EVALUATIONS Is there partner supervision on all pro bono matters? Do partner supervisors or, if applicable, senior associates provide written evaluations of associates work on pro bono matters? If so, are those evaluations taken into account in determining salary or bonuses?, they are taken into account in determining salary and bonuses Are those evaluations taken into account in determining advancement within the firm? Is there a pro bono requirement at your firm? No Does the firm give billable hour credit for pro bono work? Does the firm have a maximum number of pro bono hours that can be applied toward the billable hour target? No Does the firm consider pro bono hours when determining bonuses? PRO BONO POINTS What training opportunities are open to associates working on pro bono matters? All lawyers are encouraged to attend training programs on various legal subjects offered by legal services referral agencies, such as the Children s Law Center of Massachusetts, Volunteer Lawyers Project, Women s Bar Foundation, the Lawyers Clearinghouse, Political Asylum and Immigration Representation Project, and Boston Bar Association Business Law Pro Bono Project. In addition, the firm offers extensive training programs in a variety of areas, including, domestic violence and sexual assault prevention, deposition skills, motion practice, appellate advocacy, trial skills, and corporate work. We also have a nonprofit practice group within the firm that meets regularly to exchange ideas, engage in informal learning, and discuss topics of relevance to that practice. Does the firm offer the use of support staff in handling pro bono matters? Please indicate how many total hours and average hours per person your summer associates spent performing pro bono work in 2014 and 2015. Please round to the nearest hour and include numbers only: do not use commas, decimal points or labels. Total hours summer associates spent on pro bono work 2014: 655 2015: 492 Average hours per summer associate spent on pro bono work 2014: 36 2015: 25 Percentage of summer associates in your firm s U.S. office(s) engaged in pro bono work 2014: 83% 2015: 60% Does the firm have established programs, such as externships, that enable its associates to work in a public interest setting? If so, please describe the established program(s) and their duration, if applicable. In 1997, the firm initiated a program with the Norfolk County District Attorney s Office in which litigation associates may spend four months working full-time at that office. This program offers an opportunity to serve the public, and it provides litigation associates with substantial trial experience. What other law-related public interest and community service programs (that are not pro bono as defined by the law firm pro bono challenge) do you offer and manage? For example, list any law school collaborations and public interest scholarships, 168
auctions at law schools, monetary support, or fellowships applicable. Individual lawyers have served as bar association officers, section chairs and members of special committees appointed by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to study gender bias in the courts and to implement the canons of ethics governing clerks of court. One attorney is an appointed member of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court s Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services. Others have participated on bar association task forces addressing court reform, unrepresented litigants, and the use of technology in the courts. Foley Hoag lawyers have served on the advisory group to the federal district court s Civil Justice Reform Committee, aided in the reform of the state system of corrections, and served on the Board of Bar Overseers. Foley Hoag associates have been selected by the Boston Bar Association to serve in the Boston Bar Association s Public Interest Leadership Program, which promotes civic engagement and public service by advancing the leadership role of lawyers in service to their community. Nominations for this program are collected from across the Commonwealth, and only lawyers who have demonstrated a commitment to pro bono, public service, and organized bar activities are chosen. Fellows strive to advance the leadership role of lawyers in service to their community, the legal profession, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In 2015-2016, Foley Hoag, along with Biogen Idec, sponsored an Equal Justice Works Fellow, who will provide legal representation, outreach, and policy advocacy to low-income elders with mental health diagnoses and cognitive limitations who suffer from abuse, exploitation, neglect, and self-neglect. The Fellow will work in partnership with Greater Boston Legal Services. Equal Justice Works creates public interest opportunities for law students and lawyers that provide training and skills that enable attorneys to provide effective representation to underserved communities and causes. What non-law related volunteer opportunities does your firm offer? For example, list any work with high school students and non-legal volunteerism for organizations like habitat for humanity. Please limit your answer to 200 words or less. In 1980, the firm established the Foley Hoag Foundation to combat racism, especially among youth, in the city of Boston. The Foundation awards grants to organizations that work to improve Boston s racial climate by addressing issues of diversity and race. Since 1981, the Foundation has awarded over 500 grants totaling $1.5 million. Grants are awarded to organizations working to improve the social climate by addressing inequality in its many forms. Supported programs include art/cultural activities, youth leadership/ recreational programs, and assistance with advocacy. While the Foundation is professionally managed with independent trustees, every year lawyers and others at Foley Hoag, from summer associates to senior partners, volunteer to review grant proposals and recommend grantees to the Foundation s trustees. One of our attorneys has been named a member of the American Bar Foundation Fellows, an honorary organization of attorneys, judges, law faculty and legal scholars whose public and private careers have demonstrated outstanding dedication to the welfare of their communities and to the highest principles of the legal profession. Each year the firm funds the American Intellectual Property Law Education Foundation, which provides scholarships and mentoring to underrepresented minority law school students pursuing careers in intellectual property law. In addition, many of our lawyers serve on the boards of legal services organizations, charitable organizations, civil rights groups, and professional organizations. These activities reflect the firm s strong commitment to the public good. Please list special recognition or awards your firm has won in the last three years for its pro bono work. 2014 Awards Foley partner Andrew Schwartz and alumnus Joshua Pemstein received the Arts & Business Council of Greater Boston s 2014 Robert B. Fraser Award for Pro Bono Excellence. Foley Hoag associates Kathleen Brill and Kevin J. Conroy received the Pro Bono Civil Rights Award from the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice. Foley Hoag associate Eric Haskell received the Political Asylum & Immigration Representation Project (PAIR) 2014 Outstanding Achievement Award. pro bono legal services for calendar year 2013. Vault ranked Foley Hoag #3 in the Pro Bono category. The American Lawyer ranked Foley Hoag #14 out of the Am Law 200 law firms in its 2014 Pro Bono Scorecard. 2015 Awards Foley Hoag partner Michael Keating was honored with the Veterans Legal Services Distinguished Service Award. pro bono legal services for calendar year 2014. Foley Hoag associates Kristyn Bunce DeFilipp and Caroline Donovan received the Pro Bono Civil Rights Award from the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice. Vault ranked Foley Hoag #2 in the Pro Bono category. Foley Hoag received an award from the Lex Mundi Pro Bono Foundation for providing critical pro bono legal services that help to strengthen the global rule of law, support the global social entrepreneurship movement, and improve the lives of the world s poor and disenfranchised. The American Lawyer ranked Foley Hoag #11 out of the Am Law 200 law firms in its 2015 Pro Bono Scorecard. Visit www.vault.com for company rankings, ratings and reviews to learn what it s really like to work in an industry or company and how to position yourself to land that job. 169
2016 Awards pro bono legal services for calendar year 2015. Foley Hoag associate Amanda Vendig received the Pro Bono Civil Rights Award from the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice for her work with the organization s Economic Justice Project. The American Lawyer ranked Foley Hoag #24 out of the Am Law 200 law firms in its 2016 Pro Bono Scorecard. Foley Hoag was named Top Pro Bono Firm of 2016 by Law360. Foley Hoag received the 2016 Champion Award from the Victim Rights Law Center for its work on behalf of sexual assault survivors. Please add any additional information about your firm s pro bono program. You might want to touch on some of the following issues: firm s pro bono philosophy; procedures for undertaking pro bono; assignments; staffing of pro bono cases; general volunteering opportunities (outside of legal services); salary structure as it relates to pro bono work and billable hours or bonuses; international pro bono; opportunities; pro bono hours by office or region, including overseas. Foley Hoag has a deep commitment to public and community service. We believe it is every attorney s professional and ethical responsibility to ensure that our justice system is open to all persons, regardless of income. Foley Hoag is a signatory to the Pro Bono Institute s annual Law Firm Pro Bono Challenge. Our goal is to devote 5% of the total time spent on regular billable work to pro bono matters 2% more than required by the Challenge. Foley Hoag provides the same quality of work and dedicates the same level of staffing to pro bono clients as we do to paying clients. We do not cap the number of hours a lawyer may devote to pro bono representation. We accept cases from 50+ legal services and pro bono referral organizations, and provide pro bono assistance to more than 200 non-profit organizations. Lawyers can also bring pro bono matters to the firm. It is the firm s goal to engage in a wide variety of pro bono projects, and have all offices take part. As such, attorneys in our Boston, New York, Paris and Washington. D.C. offices all have the privilege of making a difference locally, nationally and across the globe. 170