|
Founded on the principles of
Civil Rights and Anti-Discrimination Laws, the practice of Loughlin &
Latimer was founded more than 10 years ago by Michaelene Loughlin, Esq. and
Stephen M. Latimer, Esq. who together have over fifty years
experience in civil rights law. No strangers to complex and often
controversial cases, both attorneys had the vision to provide a legal
practice that "served the people" of New Jersey as well as many other
states.
The violation of basic civil rights and
discrimination on many levels still exists in private as well as public
and government establishments, and the need for experienced attorneys
well-versed in constitutional and civil rights law continues on now,
more than ever before.
Earning the respect of their peers and
their clients, the attorneys practicing at Loughlin & Latimer have but
one focus in mind; provide quality legal services in order to protect
the rights of the individual. With that in mind, the firm specializes in
general discrimination, including disability, employment and housing
discrimination, special education and school discipline issues as well
as protection from creditors under the bankruptcy laws.
The firm
also handles cases of police misconduct and criminal appeals including
post conviction and habeas corpus.
Some of the significant cases that have
been argued by Loughlin & Latimer are outlined below. Please click on
the links to the left to learn more about our firm, the attorneys in the
practice as well as what services we may provide for you.
IN THE NEWS: LAWYER LAUDED FOR
HELPING SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN
IN THE NEWS: SHERIFF SETTLES LAWSUIT OVER GOP TACTICS
Significant cases
handled by Loughlin & Latimer:
Shore Regional High Sch. Bd. of Educ.
v. P.S., 381 F.3d 194 (3d Cir. 2004). A special education case in
which the Court of Appeals ordered the district to reimburse tuition
payments, related costs, and attorneys’ fees, to the parents of a
youngster who had been severely harassed over a prolonged period of time
by his peers. The parents had made a unilateral placement in a public
school where the kids who had bullied him would not be in attendance.
T.R. v. Kingwood Township Board of Education, 205 F. 3d 572
(3d Cir. 2000), a special education case which held that a preschooler
is entitled to be educated in the least restrictive environment and
where the district does not operate a preschool for typically developing
children, a private preschool is least restrictive.
P.G. v. Brick Township Board of Education, 124 F. Supp. 2d 251
(D.N.J. 2000), a special education case which held that a the parents of
a special education student were entitled to recover attorney fees and
expert fees as prevailing parties in a due process hearing.
Rodriguez v. Torres, 60 F. Supp. 2d 334, (D.N.J. 1999), an
employment discrimination case which held that a public employer may not
discriminate or retaliate against an employee because he exercised his
rights under the First Amendment to the constitution to engage in
political activity.
Love v Morton, 112 F. 3d 131 (3d Cir. 1997) affirming 944 F.
Supp. 379 (D.N.J. 1996), a habeas corpus action in which the courts held
that it violated the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to
try a man a second time after the court improperly declared a mistrial
in his first trial.
Indo American Cultural Society v Township of Edison, 930 F.
Supp. 1062 (D.N.J. 1996), a free speech and free exercise of religion
case under the First Amendment to the constitution in which the firm
helped the Indian community win its right to hold Navratri, its annual
religious and cultural festival, in the township.
|
