In December 2006, the Columbus law firm of Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur provided pro bono representation to OLAF, the Equal Justice Foundation (EJF) and the Ohio Legal Rights Service (OLRS) preparing an amicus brief for submission to the Supreme Court of the United States. The brief supported petitioners in the case of Jacob Winkelman v. Parma City School District.

Petitioners Jacob Winkelman, a special needs child, and his parents Jeffrey and Sandee Winkelman, sought to reverse the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit that prohibited them from appearing pro se to prosecute their son’s claims under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”).

Porter Wright’s Kathleen Trafford, Rob Krummen, Paul Rozelle and Josh Kimsey, with just 14 days to meet the filing deadline, prepared an exceptional brief focused on the Constitutional due process rights of the Winkelman family, which supplemented the statutory arguments advanced by petitioners and the United States. While drafts were reviewed and comments provided by EJF’s CEO and General Counsel Benson Wolman and OLRS’s Executive Director Mike Kirkman, it was clearly a tireless effort by the Porter Wright team that produced the high-quality, Constitutional arguments supportive of the family’s position.

The Supreme Court issued its 7-2 decision on May 21, 2007 in favor of the Petitioners, holding that the IDEA grants parents independent, enforceable rights, which encompass the entitlement to a free appropriate public education of their child. This decision will undoubtedly protect the rights of parents of special needs children to have meaningful and substantial access to the legal system. It is anticipated that this decision will also have a significant impact on countless families throughout the country for many years. Although the parents, and perhaps their children, would not have a right to appointment of counsel, it is anticipated that many federal courts will seek pro bono counsel for cases that appear to have merit.

The commitment to the pro bono effort by the attorneys at Porter, Wright, together with the contributions and expertise of the attorneys at EJF and OLRS, clearly demonstrates that the important Constitutional issues raised in appeal such as this can make a substantial difference in the lives of low-income individuals. Those of us in the not-for-profit world regularly seeking and providing assistance to families unable to afford counsel acknowledge our sincere gratitude for the work of law firms such as that done by Porter Wright in this case.

Winkelman United States Supreme Court Opinion (PDF Document)