“This was the first pro bono case I was put on when I came to Choate. It was such an incredible experience to be given so much responsibility so early on, and to be there for Danielle* and Thomas*, who were really depending on me.
Everyone should do pro bono, not only for themselves, but also for the people they’re representing, to make a difference and provide them with a positive experience with the legal system. If you can guide them through it in a positive way, I think you can really change people’s views.” – Emily Miller, Associate, Choate Hall & Stewart
Choate Hall & Stewart associate Emily Miller was first connected with Thomas* and Danielle* after they attended one of the Clearinghouse’s Legal Clinics for the Homeless.
Months prior to the clinic, Thomas and Danielle had been living with their infant son in the attic unit of a multifamily home. They had raised several issues with their landlord, including issues with fluctuations in the temperature of the unit, but their concerns had gone unanswered. When the City of Boston performed a site visit, officials determined the unit was not legally inhabitable because it lacked a second exit in case of emergency.
Thomas, who was recovering from a recent surgery, and Danielle were summoned to a hearing, where they were ordered to immediately vacate their home. Though they were able to leave their son with local family members, they had to spend months living out of their car in the midst of the frigid New England winter.
By the time they met Emily, Thomas and Danielle had finally been able to move in with family, but the experience of losing their home and living in their car had left them shaken and stressed about their future housing stability. Their landlord had also refused to refund their security deposit or compensate them for the many additional costs they faced while functionally homeless. They had had to rent a storage unit and P.O. Box, buy more warm clothing, and eat out far more frequently.
Emily sought to negotiate with the landlord’s counsel, but after negotiations fell through she issued a demand letter on behalf of Thomas and Danielle. She asserted that they had claims to compensation under a number of Massachusetts statutes, including the security deposit statute, the quiet enjoyment statute, and consumer protection statute.
The landlord and his attorney eventually agreed to settle with Thomas and Danielle, offering them an amount equal to three-times their original security deposit plus additional compensation for what they had gone through since being forced from their home.
Today, Thomas and Danielle are still living with family, but they hope to move out soon and find a safe and stable home where they can raise their son.
*Clients’ names changed to protect privacy.
