Your firm’s key matters included representing Medicare beneficiaries in Alexander v. Azar with the Center for Medicare Advocacy and Justice in Aging; and working with the Center for Justice & Accountability in a Torture Victim Protection Act case. How did your firm strategize on how to approach these matters?
For strategy, we relied on close coordination with our co-counsel to maximize our respective strengths. For example, in Alexander v. Azar, we relied on the Center for Medicare Advocacy for their expertise concerning Medicare regulations—a subject matter outside of our typical practice. In turn, we focused on the fundamentals of driving large-scale impact litigation, including handling discovery disputes and numerous aspects of motion practice, and bringing our trial expertise and resources to bear toward what eventually proved to be a winning strategy.
In the Torture Victim Protection Act case, we relied on our co-counsel for their knowledge about TVPA law, and for their skill in interacting with local stakeholders in Colombia to obtain information and identify witnesses. In turn, we again focused on our litigation skills, such as effectively using depositions to obtain key admissions from former paramilitary leaders. Our symbiotic relationship led to a historic verdict for our clients.
What were the most innovative aspects of these matters in your view? And who took the lead on driving innovation with the work?
In both matters, the flexibility of the teams over long periods of time stands out. In Alexander, there were multiple rounds of discovery all over the US, and we utilized attorneys and staff from our offices across the country to seamlessly move discovery forward while also retaining the ability to fulsomely respond to and defeat multiple case determinative motions filed by the defendant. This allowed us to withstand the considerable resources of the government team over several years in a highly contested matter.
The TVPA case required multiple trips to Colombia to gather evidence and depose witnesses. We quickly and effectively practiced what ultimately may have been an outcome-determinative skill—taking depositions in Colombia in unorthodox settings, utilizing real-time translation. For example, we deposed reluctant-witness former paramilitary leaders and enforcers in hotel rooms in Medellin and obtained key admissions in doing so.
Both cases were total team efforts, and emblematic of the heart, humility, and flexibility we seek to bring to bear for all of our clients across the firm. We have always been a firm of collaboration and innovation across the board, and that certainly extends to our pro bono and community service efforts. Innovation is in our DNA. Pursuit of justice on behalf of the underserved and paying it forward are vital parts of our culture.
Tell us more about the impact of the matters on the local, national, and/or global level.
In Alexander, the victory is on behalf of a nationwide class of Medicare beneficiaries to appeal adverse classifications that affect their right to Medicare coverage. The ruling protects the right of hundreds of thousands of elder or disabled Medicare patients to receive Medicare coverage for care they often desperately need. The case was litigated against three presidential administrations before the last affirmance by the Second Circuit, which the government ultimately elected not to further appeal.
In the TVPA case, a federal court ruled that former paramilitary leader Carlos Mario Jiménez Naranjo, aka “Macaco,” was liable for the killing of Eduardo Estrada, a beloved Colombian community leader who was brutally gunned down by paramilitaries commanded by Macaco. The landmark decision marked the first time a U.S. court found a symbiotic relationship between state actors and paramilitaries, and provides a strong example for similar pursuits of justice for atrocities across the world.
Why do you think your team ultimately achieved successful results?
Heart, empathy, and support. In both matters, we all worked so well together because of the shared heart and empathy that our teams and our amazing co-counsel had for our clients and for each other. From team bonding dinners in Colombia in the TVPA case, to a Hartford “Yard Goats” minor league baseball game as a break from the Alexander trial, a huge factor in our success was how we bonded together and the respect that we had for each other. In both cases, we reached a point where losing was simply unfathomable, and we were determined to obtain justice for our clients.
These efforts are not possible without the tremendous and longstanding support of pro bono from Wilson Sonsini’s excellent leadership. Impact cases like these require very significant resources and commitment. Simply put, this is a special firm community truly dedicated to impact, and we are thankful for that.
Take us back to the time the matters were resolved. What did you do to celebrate?
Both victories occurred during times when we were primarily remote, so celebrations were largely limited to celebratory video-conferences. In addition, partners Luke Liss and Dylan Savage, and co-counsel from both the Center for Justice and Accountability and the Center for Medicare Advocacy, recently recorded a video describing the wins and Wilson Sonsini’s commitment to pro bono.
Finally, these victories have inspired us to do more. Following these cases, we have as a firm engaged in multiple new large-scale impact litigations that we are also determined to win. That is ultimately our favorite form of celebration.
Responses by Wilson Sonsini pro bono partner Luke Liss.
—With assistance from Kibkabe Araya.
To contact the reporters on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story: