POUND CIVIL JUSTICE INSTITUTE
777 6TH STREET NW, WASHINGTON, DC 20001 www.poundinstitute.org

---

Organizations Filed Purposes: THE OBJECTIVES AND GOALS OF THE INSTITUTE SHALL BE TO RECEIVE AND ADMINISTER FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AND SUPPORTING EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR LAWYERS AND MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY, CONFERENCES AND PUBLICATIONS WHICH WILL ADVANCE THE STUDY AND SCIENCE OF JURISPRUDENCE; TO PROMOTE THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE; AND TO OTHERWISE HONOR THE LIFE AND WORK OF DEAN ROSCOE POUND THROUGH SCHOLARLY ENDEAVORS DEDICATED TO IMPROVING OUR LEGAL SYSTEM THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF INTERDISCIPLINARY KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS.

THE POUND CIVIL JUSTICE INSTITUTE WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1956 BY A GROUP OF AMERICAN TRIAL LAWYERS TO HONOR AND BUILD UPON THE WORK OF ROSCOE POUND (1870-1964). POUND SERVED AS DEAN OF THE HARVARD LAW SCHOOL FROM 1916 TO 1936, AND IS ACKNOWLEDGED AS THE FOUNDER OF THE DISCIPLINE OF SOCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE. THROUGH ITS PROGRAMS, THE INSTITUTE WORKS TO GIVE LAWYERS, JUDGES, EDUCATORS, AND THE PUBLIC A BALANCED VIEW OF THE U.S. CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

JUDGES FORUM: POUND'S ANNUAL FORUM FOR STATE APPELLATE COURT JUDGES IS THE CONSUMER BAR'S MOST SIGNIFICANT OUTREACH TO THE JUDICIARY, INVOLVING FULL DAY EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS OPEN ONLY TO JUDGES. THE FORUMS PROVIDE DIRECT, SUBSTANTIVE EXPERIENCES, WITH ORIGINAL RESEARCH WRITTEN BY PROMINENT ACADEMICS, COMMENTARY BY EXPERTS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE BAR, AND SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS. THE FORUM IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR JUDGES, LEGAL SCHOLARS, AND PRACTICING ATTORNEYS TO COME TOGETHER FOR AN OPEN DIALOGUE ABOUT MAJOR ISSUES AFFECTING CIVIL JUSTICE IN AMERICA. 2020 JUDGES FORUM: DANGEROUS SECRETS: CONFRONTING CONFIDENTIALITY IN OUR PUBLIC COURTS. HELD VIA LIVE WEBCAST ON JULY 11, 2020. 70 JUDGES FROM 25 STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ATTENDED.

ACADEMIC SYMPOSIUM ON "CLASS ACTIONS, MASS TORTS, AND MDLS: THE NEXT 50 YEARS" IN PARTNERSHIP WITH LEWIS & CLARK LAW SCHOOL ON NOV. 1-2, 2019 IN PORTLAND,OR. LEGAL ACADEMICS WHO WROTE PAPERS OR PARTICIPATED INCLUDE: LYNN BAKER (TEXAS); ROBERT BONE (TEXAS); ZACHARY CLOPTON (NORTHWESTERN); JOSHUA DAVIS(SAN FRANCISCO); BRIAN FITZPATRICK (VANDERBILT); SAMUEL ISSACHAROFF (NYU); ROBERT KLONOFF (LEWIS & CLARK); ALEXANDRA LAHAV (CONNECTICUT); DAVID MARCUS(UCLA); ARTHUR MILLER (NYU); ALAN MORRISON (GW); DAVID NOLL (RUTGERS); TEDDY RAVE (HOUSTON); JUDITH RESNIK (YALE); BRIANA ROSENBAUM (TENNESSEE); ADAM STEINMAN (ALABAMA); AND BETH THORNBURG (SMU). JUDICIAL FACULTY INCLUDE OREGON SUPREME COURT JUSTICE THOMAS A. BALMER; NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS JUDGE ROBERT M. DOW JR., A MEMBER OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON CIVIL RULES AND CHAIR OF ITS RULE 23 AND MDL RULES SUBCOMMITTEES; HON. ROBERT B. FREEDMAN (RET.) FORMERLY OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA; AND HON. DAVID R. HERNDON (RET.) OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. ATTORNEYS WHO CO-WROTE PAPERS OR PARTICIPATED INCLUDE JENNIE LEE ANDERSON OF SAN FRANCISCO; LORI ANDRUS OF SAN FRANCISCO; JENNIFER BENNETT OF OAKLAND; ELIZABETH CABRASER OF SAN FRANCISCO; SARAH CROOKS OF PORTLAND; SINDHU DANIEL OF DALLAS; BRIAN DEVINE OF SAN FRANCISCO; STEVE HERMAN OF NEW ORLEANS; JOCELYN LARKIN OF SAN FRANCISCO; ELLEN RELKIN OF NEW YORK CITY; GERSON SMOGER OF DALLAS; AND DAVID SUGERMAN OF PORTLAND, OR. THE 11 PAPERS HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED IN VOLUME 24, ISSUE 2 OF THE LEWIS & CLARK LAW REVIEW (2020).

RESEARCH AND AWARDS: THE APPELLATE ADVOCACY AWARD STRIVES TO RECOGNIZE EXCELLENCE IN APPELLATE ADVOCACY IN AMERICA BY WAY OF SECURING A FINAL APPELLATE COURT DECISION WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, CONSUMER RIGHTS, CIVIL RIGHTS, ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN CIVIL CASES, OR OTHER ISSUES RELEVANT TO THE WORK OF THE POUND INSTITUTE. THE 2020 AWARD WAS PRESENTED TO TWO RECIPIENTS: 1.) MATTHEW WESSLER FOR HIS U.S. SUPREME COURT VICTORY INTEL CORP. INV. POLICY COMM. V. SULYMA, 140 S. CT. 768 (2020), IN WHICH A UNANIMOUS SUPREME COURT RULED THAT RETIREES COMPLAINING OF A BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, LEADING TO IMPRUDENT INVESTMENTS, WERE ALLOWED ADDITIONAL TIME TO FILE THEIR ACTIONS (WITHIN SIX YEARS OF LEARNING OF THE BREACH, INSTEAD OF THREE YEARS). THIS DECISION MADE IT EASIER FOR WORKERS AND THEIR FAMILIES TO SEEK REDRESS FROM EMPLOYERS FOR TAKING EXCESSIVE RISKS WITH THEIR RETIREMENT SAVINGS, REJECTING THE VIEW THAT THE TIMING OF SUCH SUITS IS TRIGGERED BY MERE RECEIPT OF DENSE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES; AND 2.) THE TEAM OF PUBLIC JUSTICE ATTORNEYS PAUL BLAND, KARLA GILBRIDE, LEAH M. NICHOLLS, ELLEN NOBLE, AND JENNIFER BENNETT (NOW OF GUPTA WESSLER) FOR THEIR U.S. SUPREME COURT VICTORY IN HOME DEPOT USA V. JACKSON139 S. CT. 1743 (2019), IN WHICH AN UNUSUAL COALITION OF JUSTICES FOUND THAT A THIRD-PARTY COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT MAY NOT REMOVE A CASE TO FEDERAL COURT, EITHER UNDER THE GENERAL FEDERAL REMOVAL PROVISIONS OR UNDER THE CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT'S REMOVAL PROVISION, 28 U.S.C. 1453. THE DECISION IS SIGNIFICANT IN THAT IT ALLOWS MORE CONSUMERS TO SUE IN STATE COURTS, AND AVOID REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT-A COMMON TACTIC EMPLOYED BY DEFENDANTS IN SUCH CASES

---

---

Data for this page was sourced from XML published by IRS (public 990 form dataset) from: https://s3.amazonaws.com/irs-form-990/202023249349300922_public.xml