Ocala, Florida criminal law lawyer represented defendant charged with two-count indictment charging him with possessing unregistered destructive devices and firearm silencers and possessing firearms in violation of a domestic violence injunction.

Bexley was arrested at his home after contacting his wife in violation of an injunction. Sumter County Sheriff’s Office deputies located six

Springfield, Illinois civil litigation lawyer represented defendant accused of attempting to close a group home for people with developmental disabilities in 2016.

In 2014, three residents with intellectual and physical disabilities moved into a single- family home on Noble Avenue in Springfield, Illinois, where they received community residential services from a state-licensed provider,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania civil litigation lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant for
breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, inevitable disclosure of confidential and proprietary information, as well as for violations of the Pennsylvania Uniform Trade Secrets Act, 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 5301 et seq., and the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831, et seq.[1] These cl

Covington, Kentucky civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendants on voting rights theory.


Sacrosanct to American Democracy is the principle of one person, one vote. This idea first emerged in Supreme Court jurisprudence in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, but the popularized mantra was recited for the first time in Wesberry v. Sanders, which held that “one man's vote

Raleigh, North Carolina criminal defense lawyer represented defendants charged with with health care fraud.

Asheboro, North Carolina based Asheboro Drug Company, Isaac F. Brady, III and Isaac F. Brady, IV were accused of dispensing controlled substances, including opioids, without taking specific steps to help ensure the drugs will not be abused or diverted.

The parties entered i

Phoenix, Arizona civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendants on First Amendment violation theories.

In 2010, the Arizona Department of Corrections issued
Order 914, under which the Department may prohibit
inmates from receiving mail containing “sexually explicit
material.” The Department invoked the order to redact
several issues of Prison Legal New

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma civil rights lawyers represented Plaitniff, who sued Defendants seeking a declaratory judgment under 42 U.S.C. 1983, that he is eligible for Medicaid benefits.


William H. Morgan III (Morgan) is an 88-year-old resident of the Community Health Center located in Wakita, Oklahoma. He was admitted to the nursing facility in February of 2015.[2] Several months prior

Sherman, Texas civil litigation lawyers represented Defendants sued by Plaintiff claiming that Defendants stole gold rings.


Jostens, Inc. (“Jostens”) brought this action against Jerry, alleging he stole gold rings from Jostens' Denton, Texas location while employed there as a security guard. This Court granted Jostens' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on March 19, 2020, and

Fort Worth, Texas criminal defense lawyer represented defendant charged with with electronic harassment.


The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that Penal Code Section 42.07(a)(7), the electronic harassment statute, "does not implicate the First Amendment" and "is not facially unconstitutional," rejecting Appellant Charles Barton's arguments to the contrary. Ex parte Barton, No. PD

Tulsa, Oklahoma civil litigation lawyers represented Plaintiffs, who sued defendants on breach of contract theories.

On October 1, 2020, Defendant Cogent sold a medical laboratory to plaintiff. It was the intent of Plaintiff that it would continue Cogent's business. Plaintiff claimed that Gates breached the agreement by creating a competing laboratory, Alpha Medical Laboratory. Plaintiffs

Tallahassee, Florida civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiffs, who sued Defendants claiming that their rights were being violated.


In this case, two K-12 teachers, a college professor, a diversity and inclusion consultant, and a soon-to-be kindergartener challenge a Florida Department of Education regulation and several recently amended statutes. Each challenged provision, they ar

Salt Lake City, Utah civil litigation lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued the State of Utah on a regulatory taking theory.


In March 2021, Utah enacted Senate Bill 189, the “Tobacco Retailer Amendments.” As relevant here, Senate Bill 189 amended Utah Code §§ 10-8-041.6 and 17-50-33 to prohibit the operation of a “Retail tobacco specialty business” within “1,000 feet of