AMICUS ADVOCACY PROJECT
The Amicus Advocacy Project
An amicus brief comes from the Latin term “amicus curiae” which means “friend of the court.” Although most amicus briefs are persuasively written to support one side of a case, they allow interested, third parties the chance to provide the court with information that is relevant and helpful to the case but that may not otherwise be brought to the court’s attention.
CHILD USA files amicus briefing in cases whose outcomes impact the civil rights of children. We have been delighted to work with numerous attorneys across the United States, and welcome partnerships with law firms to work on pro bono matters with us.
If you are an attorney who needs amicus support or would like your firm to have the opportunity to work on cutting edge amicus briefs involving child protection, please contact us at info@childusa.org.
BRIEFS
PB-36 v. Niagara Falls City School District et al.
CHILD USA wrote this amicus brief to supply the New York Court of Appeals with the legislative and public policies undergirding the New York Child Victims Act. It also presents current research on the impact that abuse has on individuals, including the many years it can take a victim or survivor...
JOHN DOE #1 & JOHN DOE #2 v. TWITTER, INC.
CHILD USA, together with non-profits and law firms dedicated to victim advocacy, wrote this amicus brief urging the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm the District Court's denial of Twitter's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' sex trafficking claims and to allow these claims to prevail. The brief...
TOM WOLF, Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and LEIGH M. CHAPMAN, Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHILD USA wrote this amicus brief in support of an Application for Invocation of King's Bench Jurisdiction filed by Governor Tom Wolf and Acting Secretary Leigh Chapman in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in which they ask the Court to invalidate the General Assembly's proposed amendment to the...
ELIZABETH SCHEARER v. ALBION FITZGERALD
CHILD USA wrote this amicus brief to supply the New York Court of Appeals with the legislative and public policies undergirding the New York Child Victims Act. It also presents current research on the impact that abuse has on individuals, including the many years it can take a victim or survivor...
MCKINNEY v. GARY SCOTT GOINS and THE GASTON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
CHILD USA wrote this amicus brief urging the North Carolina Supreme Court to reverse a three-judge panel's decision invalidating the SAFE Child Act's revival window for child sexual abuse claims under the North Carolina State Constitution. In this brief, CHILD USA addresses the following issues:...
Savan Desai v. West-Windsor Plainsboro Regional School District
CHILD USA filed this brief supporting the Plaintiff's appeal to the New Jersey Superior Court - Appellate Division. The Defendant claims the New Jersey Child Sexual Abuse Act did not excuse the notice of claim requirement for claims against government entities. CHILD USA argues that New Jersey...
W.S. v. Derek Hildreth, et al.
CHILD USA filed this brief opposing the Defendant's appeal to the Supreme Court of New Jersey. The Defendant claims the New Jersey Child Sexual Abuse Act did not excuse the notice of claim requirement for claims against government entities. CHILD USA argues that New Jersey caselaw and the...
JA/GG DOE 146 v. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF NEWARK, et al.,
CHILD USA filed this brief in supporting Plaintiff's Opposition to the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. The Defendant claims the revival provisions of the New Jersey Child Victims Act are unconstitutional and offend the Defendant's due process rights, as applied. CHILD USA argues that New Jersey...
GREGORY COHANE v. THE HOME MISSIONERS OF AMERICA d/b/a GLEMARY HOME MISSIONERS, ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA, and AL BEHM
CHILD USA filed this brief in support of Plaintiff-Appellant seeking reversal of the Superior Court decision dismissing their negligence claims on the grounds that the SAFE Child Act's revival window provision does not apply to claims against entities. CHILD USA argues that the express language of...