Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
May
5
Did I win?
Filed Under Politics | 4 Comments
When I look at this (scroll to the bottom for the Pepper Pike results), well, I must be one of those five write-ins, right? Wrong? What does this information – “Write-in 10″ with 5 votes – mean?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:07 pm May 5th, 2006 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
May
5
Did I win?
Filed Under Politics | 4 Comments
When I look at this (scroll to the bottom for the Pepper Pike results), well, I must be one of those five write-ins, right? Wrong? What does this information – “Write-in 10″ with 5 votes – mean?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:07 pm May 5th, 2006 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
May
5
The Power of Convergence (or something): Bar Assn. drops lawsuit
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
On April 27, one week ago yesterday, I wrote this post and this one, after reading this article in the Plain Dealer. The article described how the Cleveland Bar Association wanted fines ($10,000) levied against a set of parents from Akron because they went to court on behalf of their autistic son’s school needs, without a lawyer. The Bar saw that as the unauthorized practice of law.
On Tuesday, May 2, this letter to the editor appeared. It’s written by special education services lawyer, Aimee Gilman. Aimee likewise had written me after I brought her attention to the PD article and this post details her reaction, which is echoed in the PD letter.
Today, May 5, this PD article reports that the Bar Assn. has dropped its case.
[Bar association president B. Kelly] Tompkins apologized to the Woodses in announcing the withdrawal of charges, which drew harsh criticism when they were made public late last month.
“Filing this complaint was a mistake,” Tompkins wrote. “The U.S. Supreme Court should first resolve the unsettled state of the law in this important area of federal law. Until then, we intend to invest our efforts toward addressing the broader and very real needs of parents with special needs children.”
The Supreme Court is expected to decide in the next few weeks whether to hear an appeal by another local family of an autistic child, Jeff and Sandee Winkelman of Parma, on whether parents can act as their child’s attorney in federal court.
As far as what should be done to alleviate the paucity of affordable legal assistance -which is what gave rise to this situation in the first place – for the thousands of children in NEO who need special education law advice:
In making the announcement, the bar highlighted the hours its lawyers donate to help the poor with their cases and said it would “continue to advocate for the rights of children and to protect the public’s interest in competent legal representation.”
Tompkins could not say what help is offered to special-education students and their families, but did say that lawyers from the Cleveland Bar donate 4,000 to 5,000 hours a year to child and juvenile issues.
Brian Woods said if the bar really cares about helping families with disabled children, it should make public a list of lawyers specializing in special education cases who are willing to volunteer.
Hmm, well, could you tell us how many hours a year are donated to all other legal issues on an annual basis? Because to me, a person who used to work fulltime, or 1900 hours at a minimum a year for a children and mental health agency, I’m thinking that 4-5K hours/year for child and juvenile issues is very, very little. But, I don’t want to be presumptuous.
Probably a good article in that there number.
The article doesn’t illuminate any specific pressures placed on the association – by whom, on whom and with what arguments – that caused them to drop the case against the parents. But, especially in the wake of discussion about the influence of blogs on elections, I feel strongly – even if wrongly – that between the PDs articles, my blogging about it and asking Aimee about it and Aimee’s writing the PD, well – there just had to have been some ripple effects of those activities that helped pressure the bar to do the right thing. I’m sure others were irate too and tried to apply pressure in other ways.
Okay. Maybe, maybe not. But the result feels good anyway. And serve as good motivation to keep tag-teaming situations like these with all forms of communication: print, Internet, word of mouth, ack – even television.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:22 pm May 5th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
May
5
Did I win?
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
When I look at this (scroll to the bottom for the Pepper Pike results), well, I must be one of those five write-ins, right? Wrong? What does this information – “Write-in 10″ with 5 votes – mean?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:07 am May 5th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
May
5
The Power of Convergence (or something): Bar Assn. drops lawsuit
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
On April 27, one week ago yesterday, I wrote this post and this one, after reading this article in the Plain Dealer. The article described how the Cleveland Bar Association wanted fines ($10,000) levied against a set of parents from Akron because they went to court on behalf of their autistic son’s school needs, without a lawyer. The Bar saw that as the unauthorized practice of law.
On Tuesday, May 2, this letter to the editor appeared. It’s written by special education services lawyer, Aimee Gilman. Aimee likewise had written me after I brought her attention to the PD article and this post details her reaction, which is echoed in the PD letter.
Today, May 5, this PD article reports that the Bar Assn. has dropped its case.
[Bar association president B. Kelly] Tompkins apologized to the Woodses in announcing the withdrawal of charges, which drew harsh criticism when they were made public late last month.
“Filing this complaint was a mistake,” Tompkins wrote. “The U.S. Supreme Court should first resolve the unsettled state of the law in this important area of federal law. Until then, we intend to invest our efforts toward addressing the broader and very real needs of parents with special needs children.”
The Supreme Court is expected to decide in the next few weeks whether to hear an appeal by another local family of an autistic child, Jeff and Sandee Winkelman of Parma, on whether parents can act as their child’s attorney in federal court.
As far as what should be done to alleviate the paucity of affordable legal assistance -which is what gave rise to this situation in the first place – for the thousands of children in NEO who need special education law advice:
In making the announcement, the bar highlighted the hours its lawyers donate to help the poor with their cases and said it would “continue to advocate for the rights of children and to protect the public’s interest in competent legal representation.”
Tompkins could not say what help is offered to special-education students and their families, but did say that lawyers from the Cleveland Bar donate 4,000 to 5,000 hours a year to child and juvenile issues.
Brian Woods said if the bar really cares about helping families with disabled children, it should make public a list of lawyers specializing in special education cases who are willing to volunteer.
Hmm, well, could you tell us how many hours a year are donated to all other legal issues on an annual basis? Because to me, a person who used to work fulltime, or 1900 hours at a minimum a year for a children and mental health agency, I’m thinking that 4-5K hours/year for child and juvenile issues is very, very little. But, I don’t want to be presumptuous.
Probably a good article in that there number.
The article doesn’t illuminate any specific pressures placed on the association – by whom, on whom and with what arguments – that caused them to drop the case against the parents. But, especially in the wake of discussion about the influence of blogs on elections, I feel strongly – even if wrongly – that between the PDs articles, my blogging about it and asking Aimee about it and Aimee’s writing the PD, well – there just had to have been some ripple effects of those activities that helped pressure the bar to do the right thing. I’m sure others were irate too and tried to apply pressure in other ways.
Okay. Maybe, maybe not. But the result feels good anyway. And serve as good motivation to keep tag-teaming situations like these with all forms of communication: print, Internet, word of mouth, ack – even television.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:22 am May 5th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
May
5
The Power of Convergence (or something): Bar Assn. drops lawsuit
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
On April 27, one week ago yesterday, I wrote this post and this one, after reading this article in the Plain Dealer. The article described how the Cleveland Bar Association wanted fines ($10,000) levied against a set of parents from Akron because they went to court on behalf of their autistic son’s school needs, without a lawyer. The Bar saw that as the unauthorized practice of law.
On Tuesday, May 2, this letter to the editor appeared. It’s written by special education services lawyer, Aimee Gilman. Aimee likewise had written me after I brought her attention to the PD article and this post details her reaction, which is echoed in the PD letter.
Today, May 5, this PD article reports that the Bar Assn. has dropped its case.
[Bar association president B. Kelly] Tompkins apologized to the Woodses in announcing the withdrawal of charges, which drew harsh criticism when they were made public late last month.
“Filing this complaint was a mistake,” Tompkins wrote. “The U.S. Supreme Court should first resolve the unsettled state of the law in this important area of federal law. Until then, we intend to invest our efforts toward addressing the broader and very real needs of parents with special needs children.”
The Supreme Court is expected to decide in the next few weeks whether to hear an appeal by another local family of an autistic child, Jeff and Sandee Winkelman of Parma, on whether parents can act as their child’s attorney in federal court.
As far as what should be done to alleviate the paucity of affordable legal assistance -which is what gave rise to this situation in the first place – for the thousands of children in NEO who need special education law advice:
In making the announcement, the bar highlighted the hours its lawyers donate to help the poor with their cases and said it would “continue to advocate for the rights of children and to protect the public’s interest in competent legal representation.”
Tompkins could not say what help is offered to special-education students and their families, but did say that lawyers from the Cleveland Bar donate 4,000 to 5,000 hours a year to child and juvenile issues.
Brian Woods said if the bar really cares about helping families with disabled children, it should make public a list of lawyers specializing in special education cases who are willing to volunteer.
Hmm, well, could you tell us how many hours a year are donated to all other legal issues on an annual basis? Because to me, a person who used to work fulltime, or 1900 hours at a minimum a year for a children and mental health agency, I’m thinking that 4-5K hours/year for child and juvenile issues is very, very little. But, I don’t want to be presumptuous.
Probably a good article in that there number.
The article doesn’t illuminate any specific pressures placed on the association – by whom, on whom and with what arguments – that caused them to drop the case against the parents. But, especially in the wake of discussion about the influence of blogs on elections, I feel strongly – even if wrongly – that between the PDs articles, my blogging about it and asking Aimee about it and Aimee’s writing the PD, well – there just had to have been some ripple effects of those activities that helped pressure the bar to do the right thing. I’m sure others were irate too and tried to apply pressure in other ways.
Okay. Maybe, maybe not. But the result feels good anyway. And serve as good motivation to keep tag-teaming situations like these with all forms of communication: print, Internet, word of mouth, ack – even television.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:22 am May 5th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
