Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP

Contact
Benjamin C. Weinberg
888.858.6429
312.876.7445

 

Pro Bono Overview

Print this page   Email this page to a colleague
Equip for Equality
(L-R) Equip for Equality Senior Attorney John Whitcomb; Managing Attorney Laura Miller;
Legal Advocacy Director Barry Taylor; and
Policy Analyst E.G. Enbar.

Pro Bono Commitment at Sonnenschein

Sonnenschein is committed to using our legal talent and resources to improve the lives of those around us. This work has been a hallmark of our firm since its founding, and the commitment to pro bono has grown steadily in recent years. In 2009, Sonnenschein moved up to the 26th spot on The American Lawyer's Pro Bono 100 list, which recognizes the top 100 firms in the U.S. for pro bono work. We provide pro bono clients the same resources and the same engagement level that we offer to large commercial and institutional clients so that we can serve the public interest and help those who otherwise lack the means to seek legal assistance.

Read more about our Pro Bono commitment at Sonnenschein.


Representative Pro Bono Work



Spotlight on Pro Bono
Pro Bono Pathways
The fall 2009 edition of Pro Bono Pathways features articles about Sonnenschein's outstanding recent pro bono work, including successful death penalty work, federal civil rights litigation, Immigration Equality asylum representations across the country, award-winning transactional work on behalf of an Islamic Community Center in California and more.

Sonnenschein Achieves Victory in Pro Bono Environmental Case
Sonnenschein attorneys Nick Yost, Sarah Ratcliffe Choi and Matthew Adams convinced a federal judge in California to dismiss a suit challenging the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), which would provide for both species/habitat protection and improved reliability of water supplies in California's Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.  The lawsuit, brought by two water agencies, claimed that the state and federal agencies' notices of preparation and notice of intent violated CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) and NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act), respectively.
 
Sonnenschein represented six different non-profit environmental organizations in the case who were sued because of their role and participation in the BDCP planning process.  Those groups, along with other defendants, filed motions to dismiss in the Eastern District of California on multiple grounds, with the main point being that that the claims were not ripe under NEPA.